UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

Class 


Testament  l^antrftoofts 

EDITED  BY 
SHAILER    MATHEWS 


HISTORY   OF   NEW   TESTAMENT 
TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

175   B.C.-70  A.D. 


NEW  TESTAMENT  HANDBOOKS 

EDITED  BY   SHAILER   MATHEWS 

THE    UNIVERSITY   OF    CHICAGO 


A  series  of  volumes  presenting  briefly  and  intelligibly  the 
results  of  the  scientific  study  of  the  New  Testament.  Each  vol- 
ume covers  its  own  field,  and  is  intended  for  the  general  reader  as 
well  as  the  special  student. 

i2mo    Cloth    75  cents  each 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  TEXTUAL  CRITICISM  OF  THE  NEW 
TESTAMENT.  Professor  MARVIN  R.  VINCENT,  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  OF  THE  NEW 
TESTAMENT.  Professor  HENRY  S.  NASH,  Cambridge  Divinifrv 
School. 

INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Professor  B.  WISXEH  BACON,  Yale  Divinity  School. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE. 

Professor  SHAILER  MATHEWS,  The  University  of  Chicago. 

THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS.     Professor  GEORGE  B.   STEVENS, 

Yale  Divinity  School. 

THE  BIBLICAL  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 
Professor  E.  P.  GOULD. 


Scale  of  English  Miles. 


;f    /    A    u    i    s 


<:  '  NAIN*  V     *GADARA 

V  ^  $   B,  A  T  A   N    E 

\A  -.^•1 : 


MARIA 


TT-*0^-          ACRABf. 

ARCHELAIS 
RIS  SHILOH, 

ALEXANDRtON' 
EPHRAIM  „ 

BETHEL.         PHASAEL 
•  MICHMAS 
S       ,BETH  HORON 
?.  JERICHO* 

D     ADASAE  A 

RUSALEM> 


HISTORY  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT 
TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


175  B.C.-70  A.D. 


BT 

SHAILER   MATHEWS,  A.M. 

PROFESSOR  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT   HISTORY  AND   INTERPRETATION 
IN  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO 


ff  atfc 
THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

LONDON :  MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  LTD. 

1908 

AH  right*  reserved 


COPYRIGHT,  1899, 
BY  THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped  October,  1899.     Reprinted  June, 
1900  ;  February,  1902 ;  October,  1904 ;  July,  1906  ;  February,  19 


J.  S.  Gushing  &  Co.  —  Berwick  &  Smith 
Norwood  Mass.  U.S.A. 


Jig  JFatJjer 


213273 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 

THE  JEWS  UNDER  THE  SELEUCIDJE  .....        1 

Alexander  and  Judea  —  Organisation  and  Extent 
of  Judea  —  Threefold  Development  in  Jewish  Life: 
(1)  The  Wisdom  Literature ;  (2)  Ritualism  and  the 
High  Priest.  Hellenism  in  the  Priesthood ;  (3)  Le- 
galism.  The  Chasidim. 


CHAPTER  H 

ANTIOCHUS    EPIPHANES    AND    THE    Loss    OF    RELIGIOUS 

LIBERTY 13 

The  Taxes  under  Antiochus  IV — His  First  Attacks 
upon  Judea  —  Persecution  of  the  Jews  —  Results  of 
the  Persecution :  Growth  of  the  Canon ;  Impulse  to 
Messianic  Hope ;  Revolt  of  Mattathias. 


CHAPTER  III 

JUDAS  MACCABEUS  AND  THE  REESTABLISHMENT  OF  RE- 
LIGIOUS LIBERTY  (165-161  B.C.)  ....       23 

Judas — His  Early  Victories  —  Restoration  of  the 
Temple  Worship  —  Political  Ambitions  of  Judas  — 
Later  Relations  of  Judas  with  (1)  the  Chasidim  and 
(2)  Rome  —  His  Death. 

vii 


Vlil  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER   IV 

PAGE 

JONATHAN  AND  THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  NATIONALITY  (161- 

143  B.C.) 36 

First  Reverses  of  Jonathan  —  Status  of  the  Asmo- 
neans  —  Jonathan  made  High  Priest  by  Alexander 
Balas  —  Rapid  Rise  of  Jonathan  —  His  Death.  ( 


CHAPTER  V 

SIMON  AND  THE  CONSOLIDATION  OF  JUDAISM  (143-135  B.C.)       47 

Early  Career  and  Character  of  Simon  —  Indepen- 
dence all  but  gained  —  Made  Hereditary  High  Priest 
—  General  Character  of  his  Reign  —  His  Last  Years. 


CHAPTER  VI 

JOHN   HYRCANUS   AND   POLITICAL    INDEPENDENCE    (135- 

105  B.C.) 59 

Danger  from  Antiochus  Sidetes — Victories  of  John 
—  The  Pharisees  —  The  Sadducees  —  John's  Change 
of  Party  —  Development  of  Judaism  —  The  Essenes. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES  WITH  THE  ASMONEANS 

AND  THE  SADDUCEES  (105-69  B.C.)       ...       75 

Aristobulus  —  Alexander  Jannseus  and  the  Phari- 
sees :  Reasons  for  their  Struggle ;  Course  of  the 
Struggle  ;  Triumph  of  the  Monarchy  ;  Literature  of 
Alexander's  Reign  ;  the  Messianic  Hope  — Alexandra 
and  the  Pharisaic  Reaction. 


CONTENTS  IX 


CHAPTER   VIII 

PAGB 

THE  ROMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA 91 

Defeat  of  Hyrcanus  II  by  Aristobulus  II  —  The 
Appeal  to  Pompey  —  The  Fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the    - 
Reorganisation  of  Judea  —  New  Phase  in  Development 
of  Pharisaism,  Sadduceeism,  and  the  Messianic  Hope. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  RISE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  ANTIPATER          .         .         .     100 

Antipater  —  Caesar  and  Judea  —  Judea  under  Hyr- 
canus II  and  the  House  of  Antipater. 


CHAPTER  X 

HEROD  I  AND  THE  CHANGE  OF  DYNASTY          .        .        .     108 

Revolt  of  Antigonus  —  Herod  conquers  his  Kingdom 

—  Allied  Kings  —  Significance  of  the  Reign  of  Herod 

—  His  Destruction  of  the  Asmonean   House  —  His 
Years  of  Prosperity  —  The  Years  of  Struggle  over  the 
Succession  —  Herod's  Death. 

CHAPTER  XI 

ARCHELAUS  (4  B.C.-6  A.D.)        ......     130 

Disorders  after  the  Death  of  Herod  —  The  Decision 
of  Augustus — The  Reign  and  End  of  Archelaus. 

CHAPTER   XII 

PALESTINE  UNDER  THE  ROMANS  AND  THE  TETRARCHS      .     136 

(1)  The  Province  of  Judea :  Samaria,  Judea  Proper, 
Idumea.      The  Fiscal  Powers  of   the  Procurators; 


X  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Taxes  and  Customs  ;  the  Military  and  Judicial  Powers 
of  the  Procurators.  Local  Courts.  The  Sanhedrin  — 
(2)  The  Tetrarchy  of  Philip.  Philip— (3)  The  Tet- 
rarchy  of  Herod  Antipas  :  Galilee  and  Perea.  Galilee 
and  the  Galileans.  Perea.  Herod  Antipas.  Hero- 
dias  —  (4)  The  Decapolis  and  Greek  Influence  in 
General. 

CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS  THE  MESSIAH       .        .     159 

General  Character  of  Jewish  Religious  Life  '—  Scrib- 
ism  —  The  Messianic  Hope  and  the  Kingdom  of  God 
— Literary  Messianism  —  Popular  Messianism  —  Jesus 
and  the  New  Messianism :  Jesus ;  his  Opposition  to 
Pharisaism  ;  his  Work  ;  his  Death  ;  the  Church. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

HEROD  AGRIPPA  I  AND  HEROD  AGRIPPA  II    ..        .     181 

Persecution  of  the  Christians  —  Agrippa  I  at  Rome 
—  His  Character  as  King  —  Agrippa  II. 

CHAPTER  XV 

THE  FALL  OF  JUDEA  AND  THE  RISE  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN 

CHURCH 190 

Judea  under  the  Procurators  —  Outbreak  of  the 
Great  Revolt  — The  War  in  Galilee  —  Civil  War  in 
Jerusalem  —  The  Siege  of  Jerusalem  —  The  Spread  of 
Christianity. 

APPENDIX  A 
A  GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OF  THE  SELEUCID  FAMILY        .     209 


CONTENTS 


APPENDIX  B 

PAGB 

A  GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OP  THE  ASMONEAN  FAMILY      .    210 


APPENDIX  C 
A  GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OF  THE  HERODIAN  FAMILY      .     211 

INDEX  . 213 


OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


A  HISTOKY  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT 
TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

CHAPTER  I 

THE   JEWS  UNDER   THE    SELEUCID^E  * 

THE  conquests  of  Alexander  began  a  new  era  for 
Palestine  as  well  as  for  other  regions  of  the  East. 
After  his  victory  over  Darius  III  at  Issus  (333),  Alex- 
ander advanced  steadily,  conquering  Damascus  and  Alexander 
the  cities  along  the  Mediterranean  coast,2  finally  com- 
ing  to  Tyre,  which  refused  to  surrender.  Thereupon 
began  the  famous  siege,  which,  after  seven  months, 
resulted  in  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  city,  two 
thousand  of  its  inhabitants  being  hanged  upon  its  walls, 
and  thirty  thousand  being  sold  into  slavery.  Just  as 
he  was  entering  upon  this  siege,  Alexander  summoned 
the  Jews  to  renounce  their  allegiance  to  Persia,  fur- 
nish him  with  provisions,  and  pay  him  such  tribute  as 
they  had  been  accustomed  to  pay  Darius  III.  Jaddua, 
the  high  priest,  refused  to  obey,  pleading  his  oath  of 
allegiance  to  Darius.  Alexander  consequently  threat- 
ened him  with  severe  punishment,  and  after  he  had 
reduced  Tyre,  had  allowed  the  Samaritans  to  establish 

1  General  References :  Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  186-199  ;  Ewald,  History  of 
Israel,  V.  223-293  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  I.  434-456 ; 
Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  viii.  chs.   1-8 ; 
Waddy-Moss,  From  Malachi  to  Matthew,  chs.  3-5. 

2  Ant.  xi.  8  :  3. 

B  1 


2      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Alexander 
at  Jerusa- 
lem. 


The  policy 
of  Alex- 
ander. 


The  Jews 
subject  to 
Egypt. 


a  rival  religion  upon  Mount  Gerizim,1  and  had  taken 
Gaza,  he  proceeded  against  Jerusalem.  Josephus's  ac- 
count of  the  events  that  followed,  although  not  beyond 
question,  is  possibly  correct  in  its  main  features.  On 
the  arrival  of  Alexander  at  Scopus,  he  was  met  by  Jad- 
dua  and  a  train  of  priests  in  their  robes  and  a  great  mul- 
titude in  white  garments.  The  sight  awoke  the  reli- 
gious reverence  of  the  young  conqueror,  and  he  treated 
the  city  with  favour,  even  offering  a  sacrifice  in  the 
temple.  He  further  granted  the  Jews  the  privilege 
of  living  in  accordance  with  their  own  laws,  and  freed 
them  from  tribute  during  the  sabbatical  year.2  Pales- 
tine, however,  was  incorporated  in  the  satrapy  of  Coele- 
Syria,  with  Samaria  as  its  capital.  The  subsequent 
revolt  of  the  Samaritans  brought  punishment  only  on 
themselves,  and  Judea  was  left  in  peace  throughout 
Alexander's  life,  Jewish  customs  and  prejudices  being 
treated  with  consideration.3 

With  the  later  career  of  Alexander  Jewish  history 
has  little  direct  concern,  but  his  policy  of  binding 
together  his  vast  empire  by  a  Greek  civilisation  was 
to  be  of  almost  fatal  influence  upon  the  nation.  The 
realisation  of  this  magnificent  conception  was  pre- 
vented by  Alexander's  early  death  (June  13,  323  B.C.), 
but  its  fundamental  idea,  the  unification  of  an  empire 
by  a  common  religion  and  civilisation,  was  inherited 
by  his  successors.  If  Alexander  indeed  failed  to  estab- 
lish a  lasting  empire,  his  efforts  resulted  in  the  Grseco- 
Oriental  civilisation. 

In  the  division  of  the  Macedonian  Empire  among 
the  Diadochi,  or  successors  of  Alexander,  Coele- Syria 
fell  to  Laomedon.  Ptolemy  Lagus,  who  had  received 

1  Yet  see  Cheyne,  Jewish  Religious  Life  after  the  Exile, 
chs.  1,  2.     See  in  general  on  the  period,  Kent,  History  of  the 
Hebrew  People,  III. 

2  Ag.  Apion,  ii.  5.  8  For  example,  Ant.  xi.  8  :  5. 


THE  JEWS    UNDER   THE  SELEUCID^S  3 

Egypt,  proceeded  at  once  to  conquer  Palestine  and  en- 
tered Jerusalem  one  Sabbath,  on  the  plea  of  wishing  to 
sacrifice.1  As  a  result  of  his  suzerainty  many  Jews  were 
carried  or  emigrated  to  Alexandria  and  other  cities  of 
Egypt  and  Africa,  Judea  remaining  in  possession  of 
the  Ptolemies  during  the  third  century,  though  not 
without  brief  intervals  of  subjection  to  Syria.  During 
these  years  the  condition  of  Judea  was  not  unprosper- 
ous,  as  little  was  demanded  of  the  high  priest  except 
the  annual  tribute  of  twenty  talents  of  silver. 

In  government  Judea  was  a  somewhat  remarkable  Judea  a  city- 
combination  of  a  city-state  and  a  theocracy.  The  state* 
high  priest  had  political  as  well  as  religious  suprem- 
acy, but  associated  with  him  was  the  Gerousia,  or 
Senate  of  Jerusalem.  Whether  or  not  this  body  was 
the  outgrowth  of  some  ancient  municipal  institution  of 
the  Hebrews,  or  resulted  from  the  influence  of  Helle- 
nistic life  cannot  be  determined  with  certainty.2  Pos- 
sibly it  was  the  outgrowth  of  the  assembly  of  the 
heads  of  the  150  leading  families  which  appears  in  the 
days  of  Nehemiah,3  but  beyond  the  fact  that  it  was 
aristocratic  and  composed  of  priests  and  elders  we 
know  little.  The  Jewish  people  could  meet,  perhaps, 
in  popular  bodies,  but  about  this  there  is  again  little 
information.4  In  a  word,  Judea  was  Jerusalem  and 
its  "daughters." 

The  extent  of  this  city-state  during  the  Egyptian  The  extent 

of  Judea. 

1  Ant.  xii.  1  : 1. 

2  For  its  alleged  relation  to  the  mythical  "  Great  Synagogue," 
see  Derenbourg,  Essai  sur  V  Histoire  et  la  Gfeographie  de  la  Pales- 
tine, ch.  2.     On  the  "Great  Synagogue"  in  general,  see  Ryle, 
Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  Excursus  A,  250 ;  Briggs,  Study 
of  Holy  Scripture,  120-122;  Kuenen,  "  Uber  die  Manner  der 
grossen  Synagoge,"  in  his  Gesammelte  Abhandlungen,  125  sq. 

3  Meyer,  Entstehung  des  Judenthums,  132-135. 

4  1  Mace.  12  :  6  ;  2  Mace.  4  :  44  ;  11  :  27.     Cf.  1  Mace.  1  :  26  ; 
14 : 28. 


NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Relations  of 
Judea  with 
Egypt  and 
Syria. 


Threefold 
develop- 
ment of 
Jewish  life. 
1.  The4 'wis- 
dom" liter- 
ature. 


and  Syrian  suzerainty,  while  not  definitely  known, 
was  certainly  inconsiderable.  Neither  Samaria1  nor 
Galilee 2  was  included,  nor  the  country  east  of  Jordan, 
nor  any  considerable  part  of  the  maritime  plain.3 

Nor  are  the  relations  of  Judea,  with  Egypt  and 
Syria,  altogether  clear.  Each  was  in  turn  its  suzerain, 
and,  in  fact,  at  one  time  it  would  seem  as  if,  per- 
haps because  of  intermarriage,  the  Jewish  tribute  was 
divided  between  the  two  suzerains.4  But  such  an 
arrangement  was  but  short-lived,  and  whether  Egypt 
or  Syria  was  for  the  time  being  dominant,  the  Jews 
were  locally  subject  to  this  high  priest,  who  saw  to 
it  that  the  tribute  of  20  talents  was  farmed  out,5 
collected,  and,  with  the  Temple  tax  of  10,000  drachmas, 
paid.  It  is  not  clear  that  there  was  always  a  repre- 
sentative of  the  sovereign  in  Jerusalem,  although  the 
Seleucid  house  was  later  represented  in  the  person  of 
the  eparch  —  a  sort  of  early  burg-graf. 

Of  even  more  significance  than  these  outward  politi- 
cal relations  was  the  threefold  development  which, 
during  the  years  of  political  change  following  the  death 
of  Alexander  the  Great,  characterised  the  inner  life  of 
the  Jews  —  that  of  "wisdom"  literature,  of  the  ritual 
and  priesthood  and  of  legalism.  In  all  of  these  par- 
ticulars Jewish  history  is  unique,  but  perhaps  in  none 
more  unique  than  in  the  collection  of  proverbs  and 
practical  advice  to  be  found  in  such  writings  as  our  can- 
onical Proverbs,  Job,  and  Ecclesiastes,  and  such  other 

1  Ant.  xii.  4  : 1,  4.     Cf.  1  Mace.  11  : 34,  57. 

2  The  reading  /cai  TaXiXa/as  in  1  Mace.  10  :  30  is  to  be  rejected. 
Compare  1  Mace.  11 : 34.    Kautzsch,  Apokryphen  und  Pseud- 
epigraphen,  in  loco.    Kuhn,  Die  stddtliche  und  burgerliche  Ver- 
fassung  des  romischen  Beiches,  II.  336,  340,  is  incorrect  in  saying 
that  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Perea  were  toparchies  of  Judea  before 
the  time  of  Jonathan.    Cf .  Ant.  xiii.  4  :  9. 

3  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  189-191. 

*  Ant.  xii.  4:1.  5  Ant.  xii.  4  : 1. 


THE  JEWS   UNDER   THE  SELEUCID^  5 

writings  as  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  and 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  Like  the  other  two  tenden- 
cies, this  is  rooted  deep  in  the  history  of  the  Hebrew 
race,  for  wise  sayings  of  very  ancient  origin  are  to  be 
found  in  its  early  literature.  But  during  the  post- 
exilic  period,  and  especially  after  the  Greek  influence 
began  to  be  felt,  "  wisdom  "  found  its  most  remarkable 
expression  and  became  a  literary  form.  To  speak  of 
its  literature  in  detail  is  impossible,  but  one  cannot 
overlook  its  knowledge  of  the  world  and  its  cynicism, 
as  well  as  its  more  common  characteristics,  sobriety, 
and  moral  earnestness.1 

But  good  advice  is  seldom  more  than  a  luxury,  and  2.  Ritualism 
the  history  of  the  Jews  was  to  centre  about  the  strug-  a^stthe  high 
gles  between  the  two  other  tendencies  which  began 
during  these   years    to  show  themselves  so  clearly. 
Indeed,  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  or  three  hundred 
years  preceding  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus 
may  be  said  to  be  filled  with  little  else  than  the  grad- 
ual and  unobserved  triumph  of  legalism  in  the  persons 
of  the  Pharisees  over  ritualism,  whether  in  the  persons 
of  the  Sadducees  or  of  the  nation  as  a  whole. 

At  the  outset  the  two  forces  were  in  harmony.  The 
Jewish  state  was  a  theocracy,  the  high  priest  at  its 
head  being  held  responsible  for  the  tribute  until  Onias 
II,  either  from  his  pro-Syrian  leanings  or  from  sheer 
incapacity,  neglected  to  send  the  required  20  talents 
to  Ptolemy  Euergetes  of  Egypt.  Such  an  act  was 
close  to  rebellion  and  nearly  led  to  the  destruction  of 
Judea.  As  it  was,  it  resulted  in  the  sale  of  the  taxes 
to  one  Joseph,  an  adventurer  of  extraordinary  boldness  Joseph, 
and  ability,  who  became  a  sort  of  satrap  in  Judea  and  for 

1  In  general  see  Introductions,  especially  Driver's,  and  more 
particularly  Cheyne,  Jewish  Religious  Life  after  the  Exile,  chs. 
4,  5 ;  Kent,  The  Wise  Men  of  Israel ;  and  Renan,  Graetz,  and 
Schurer  by  index. 


6       NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Hellenism 


twenty-two  years  held  this  position,  mingling  severity 
with  liberality l  so  successfully  that  during  the  entire 
period  the  Jews  were  not  only  at  peace  with  their 
neighbours,  but  reasonably  prosperous  in  their  internal 
affairs.2  The  ultimate  results,  however,  of  this  new 
departure  in  the  administration  of  the  state  were  not 
all  so  happy.  Not  only  did  it  Isad  to  civil  strife,  but 
the  control  of  the  taxes  tended  to  concentrate  wealth 
in  the  hands  of  Joseph  and  his  sons  and  in  those  of 
the  various  agents  they  employed.  There  was  thus 
formed  a  wealthy  official  class  whose  sympathies  were 
increasingly  with  the  Hellenistic  culture  discovered 
during  their  intercourse  with  the  Egyptian  court.3 
Jewish  society  thus  began  more  rapidly  to  feel  those  in- 
fluences of  Hellenism  that  were  soon  to  play  so  tragic 
and  the  new  a  role  in  its  life — influences  that  were  strengthened 
by  the  unofficial  relations  existing  between  Palestine 
and  the  Jewish  communities  already  flourishing  in 
Alexandria  and  other  Egyptian  cities. 

Such  a  responsible  position  as  this  of  Joseph  in 
itself  implies  a  loss  of  prestige  on  the  part  of  the  high 
priest,  but  does  not  seem  to  involve  any  attempt  at  his 
humiliation  or  at  the  destruction  of  Judaism.  Even, 
when  after  his  victory  over  Antiochus  III  at  Eaphia 
(217  B.C.)  Ptolemy  IV  (Philopator)  entered  into  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem,  he  offered  sacrifices,  and  his 
worst  offence  seems  to  have  been  that  he  forced  his 
way  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.4  At  the  battle  of  Banias 
(198  B.C.)  Palestine  fell  wholly  into  the  hands  of  An- 
tiochus III  and  a  brighter  day  seemed  about  to  dawn. 
The  Jews  were  kindly  treated  by  their  new  ruler,  who 
recognised  their  value  as  colonists  and  settled  thousands 

1  Ant.  xii.  4:3.  2  Ant.  xii.  4. 

8  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  I.  440  f . 

*  So  much  at  least  seems  historical,  though  the  details  of 
3  Mace.  1:9-2:  24  are  certainly  legendary. 


Palestine 
subject  to 
Antiochus 
III. 


THE  JEWS   UNDER   THE  SELEUCID^E  7 

of  them  in  the  various  new  cities  which  he  founded. 
They  were  granted  the  right  to  live  in  accordance  with 
their  own  laws,  were  relieved  from  a  considerable  por- 
tion of  their  taxes,  while  those  of  their  number 
who  were  in  slavery  were  allowed  to  return.  This 
friendly  legislation  went  so  far  as  to  make  it  a  crime 
to  carry  into  Jerusalem  such  meats  as  the  Jews  were 
forbidden  to  eat,  while  Seleucus  IV  is  said1  to  have 
borne  all  the  costs  of  the  sacrifices.2 

The  failure  of  the  attempt  of  Seleucus  IV,  through 
Heliodorus,  to  get  possession  of  the  temple  treasures 
must  have  still  further  strengthened  the  position  of 
the  high  priest.3  But  this  development  was  suddenly  The  high 
threatened,  not  alone  by  unaccustomed  oppression  on 
the  part  of  Syria,  but  by  the  mistaken  policy  of  the 
high  priests  themselves. 

Under  the  Seleucid  suzerains  devotion  to  Hellenism 
became  identified  with  loyalty.  For  there  had  grown 
up  in  Jerusalem  a  strong  pro-Syrian  party  which  sought 
political  safety  in  complete  dependence  upon  Syria. 
Its  numbers  were  probably  never  large,  but  it  embraced 
most  of  the  prominent  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  and  its 
position  was  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  the  high 
priest  was  now  the  king's  appointee.4  This  political 
sympathy  was  very  naturally  accompanied  by  a  predilec- 
tion for  Greek  culture  and  by  a  willingness  to  abandon 
Judaism  as  a  cult.  It  might  have  been  expected  that 
the  high  priest  would  have  strongly  opposed  these  lat- 
ter particulars,  and  it  is  true  that  under  the  admin- 

1  2  Mace.  3:3.  2  Ant.  xii.  3  : 3. 

8  It  is  hardly  possible  that  the  astonishing  legend  of  2  Mace. 
3  should  not  contain  this  much  of  historical  worth.  It  is  not 
impossible  that  the  event  lies  behind  the  reference  to  Polybius 
quoted  by  Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  3  :  3.  Ewald,  History  of  Israel, 
V.  268-274,  gives  a  good  account  of  the  high-priesthood. 

*  Ant.  xii.  5  : 1. 


8       NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

istration  of  Onias  III  an  effort  was  made  to  stem  the 
latitu dinar ian  movement,  but  with  unfortunate  results. 
The  lines  of  cleavage  along  religious  and  political  lines 
were  so  close  together  as  not  only  to  make  the  Syrian 
elements  Hellenistic,  but  to  make  their  opponents  ap- 
parently loyal  to  Egypt.  So  bitter  was  the  opposition 
to  Onias  on  the  part  of  the  Syrian  party  —  notably 
on  that  of  one  Simon  the  Benjamite  —  that  he  was 
forced  to  leave  Jerusalem  and  for  some  time  to  live  as 
a  sort  of  exile-ambassador  at  Antioch.  His  absence 
aided  the  Hellenistic  Syrian  party,  for  not  only  was 
his  brother  Jason  (or  Jesus),  who  acted  as  his  repre- 
sentative, a  strong  friend  of  Hellenism,  but  the  irrepres- 
sible son  of  Joseph,  Hyrcanus,  whom  Onias  had  be- 
friended, complicated  the  situation  by  continuing  to 
collect  taxes  for  Egypt  throughout  the  region  on  the 
east  of  Jordan  commanded  by  his  great  castle.1 
Accession  of  It  was  while  affairs  were  in  this  condition  that  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes  succeeded  his  brother  Seleucus  IV. 
Instantly  the  Hellenistic  party  grew  stronger.  Jason 
succeeded  by  large  promises  in  getting  Onias  III  re- 
moved and  himself  appointed  as  high  priest.2  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes,  who  had  already  determined  upon 
the  policy  of  religious  conformity,  willingly  gave  his 
consent.  Jason  was  established  as  high  priest.  Then 
followed  the  extraordinary  spectacle  of  a  Jewish  city 
undertaking  to  instal  a  heathen  civilisation,  of  priests 
abandoning  their  sacrifices,  of  Jewish  youths  exer- 
cising under  Greek  hats,  and  of  a  high  priest  send- 
ing 300  drachmas  of  silver  to  Tyre  for  a  sacri- 
fice to  Hercules.8  Jason  suffered  the  fate  he  had 

1  Ant.  xii.  4:11.     The  remains  of  this  castle  are  still  to  be 
seen  at  'Arak  el-Emir. 

2  Among  other  things,  Jason  agreed  to  set  up  a  gymnasium 
and  to  permit  the  Jews  to  share  in  the  games  at  Antioch. 

8  The  money  was,  however,  in  deference  to  the  desire  of  the 


THE  JEWS    UN  DEE   THE  SELEUCID^  9 

brought  upon  Onias,  for  after  three  years  a  certain  Jason  and 
Menelaus,  the  brother  of  Simon  the  Benjamite,1  offered  Menelaus- 
Antiochus  a  larger  bribe  than  had  he,  and  was  made 
high  priest.  Under  his  influence  the  process  of  Hel- 
lenising  went  on  rapidly.  Surgical  operations  re- 
moved traces  of  circumcision,  and  when  Antiochus 
visited  Jerusalem  in  172  B.C.,  he  was  welcomed" 
in  Greek  fashion,  by  a  torchlight  procession,  and 
in  every  way  was  made  to  feel  that  his  policy  would 
prove  successful  and  that  it  was  only  a  matter  of  time 
before  the  Jews,  like  others  of  his  dependent  peoples, 
would  have  become  fused  in  a  Hellenistic  mould. 

This  tendency  to  reverse  the  course  of  religious  de-  Causes  of 
velopment  was  not  merely  an  evidence  of  the  rise  of  a 
political  party  and  of  personal  ambition  on  the  part  of  ment. 
the  high  priests  and  the  Gerousia.  It  resulted  also 
from  the  general  Hellenistic  movement,  which  since 
the  days  of  Alexander  had  begun  to  be  felt  through- 
out Palestine.  Not  alone  into  Alexandria  and  Asia 
Minor  but  also  into  Galilee  and  the  country  east  of 
Jordan,  did  Greek  as  well  as  Jewish  colonists  press. 
Great  centres  of  Greek  trade  grew  up  alongside  of  the 
smaller  towns  of  the  Jews.  Even  before  the  time  of 
Alexander,  Gaza  had  commercial  relations  with  Greece, 
and  Dora  was  probably  subject  to  Athens.2  Ptolemy 

messengers,  used  for  building  triremes.  In  this  entire  account 
we  are  following  2  Maccabees.  Josephus  has  a  somewhat  differ- 
ent account,  and  has  confused  Onias  III  with  Menelaus  {Ant. 
xii.  5:1).  Especially  has  he  inextricably  confused  the  various 
priests  by  the  name  of  Onias.  (Thus  cf.  Ant.  xii.  5  :  1  with  xii. 
4  : 10.)  Yet  2  Maccabees  is  not  altogether  accurate,  for  it  ap- 
parently antedates  the  embassy  sent  by  Judas  to  Rome  (1  Mace. 
8  : 17)  and  ascribes  it  to  John,  the  father  of  Eupolemus,  rather 
than  Eupolemus  himself  (2  Mace.  4  :  11). 

1  2  Mace.  4 :  23.     Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  5:1,  says  he  was  the 
brother  of  Jason  himself. 

2  See  also  2  Mace.  6  :  8,  where  Greek  cities  are  spoken  of  as 
within  Judea. 


10     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Philadelphia  had  favoured  Greek  colonisation  in  Ju- 
dea,  and,  as  if  to  offset  this  tendency,  there  had  al- 
ready begun  the  emigration  that  was  to  carry  the  Jews 
into  all  quarters  of  the  known  world.  In  Alexandria, 
thanks  to  the  efforts  of  Alexander  himself,  as  well 
as  natural  emigration,  the  Jews  numbered  hundreds 
of  thousands.  Fortunately,  the  influences  they  there 
felt  were  not  those  of  the  Hellenism  that  so  often 
ruined  the  Eastern  peoples,  but  rather  those  which 
sprang  from  the  schools.  By  the  end  of  the  second 
century  we  find  at  least  one  Jewish  philosopher, 
Aristobulus,1  and  several  poets,2  and  at  least  a  few 
The  Jews  in  years  later,  Jews  held  high  political  and  military 
Alexandria.  Of£ce  under  Egyptian  rulers.  But  they  chiefly  shared 
in  the  Grseco-Egyptian  intellectual  life,  and  already 
there  had  begun  that  synthesis  which  was  later  to  give 
the  world  Philo  and  the  Kabbala.  The  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures were  already  translated  into  Greek,  and  religious 
writings  had  begun  to  appear  in  the  same  language. 
Thus,  by  their  own  kin  in  Egypt  as  well  as  by  the 
heathen  who  ruled  and  surrounded  them,  the  Jews  of 
Palestine  were  being  brought  under  the  influence  of 
an  Orientalised  Greek  civilisation  that  rarely,  if  ever, 
failed  to  effect  a  change  for  the  worse. 

With  Greek  influences  thus  ubiquitous  and  persist- 
ent, it  is  not  strange  that  men  like  Menelaus  should 
have  been  eager  to  lead  Judea  out  from  its  isolation 
into  the  circle  of  a  more  brilliant  civilisation.  They 
may  not  have  desired  utterly  to  abandon  Jehovah,  but 
they  very  clearly  were  eager  to  abandon  the  exclusive- 
ness  of  the  Jewish  cult  in  search  for  a  denationalised 
religion.3  Such  a  tendency  might  very  easily  have 
become  an  outright  conversion  to  heathenism,  but  this, 
with  necessary  exceptions,  a  just  allowance  for  the 

i  2  Mace.  1 : 10.       2  Ewald,  V.  260.       8  1  Mace.  1 :  11,  12. 


THE  JEWS    UNDER   THE  SELEUCID^        11 

sympathies  of  Josephus  and  the  two  books  of  Macca-  Probable  in- 
bees,  will  hardly  permit  us  to  discover.     Theirs  was  a  Mene°laus.f 
religious  indifferentism  coupled  with  the  enthusiasm 
of  an  abortive  renaissance,  but  it  was  not  idolatry. 

The  prostitution  of  the  priesthood  seems  to  have 
been  endured  within  Jerusalem  itself,  whose  inhabi- 
tants had  been  specially  honoured  by  Antiochus  III, 
and  where  the  Syrian  garrison  made  resistance  futile; 
but  when  the  report  of  the  doings  of  Menelaus  reached 
the  outlying  country,  there  was  a  general  rising  in  the  Protests 
interest  of  decency  and  religion.  The  Gerousia  itself 
sent  messengers  to  Antiochus  to  prefer  charges  against 
the  high  priest.  But  all  was  in  vain.  Menelaus  bribed 
the  king,  stole  and  sold  some  of  the  sacred  vessels  of 
the  temple,  and  the  wretched  accusers  paid  the  pen- 
alty of  their  temerity  with  their  lives,1  as  did  also  the 
aged  Onias  III,  whom  even  the  sanctuary  of  Apollo  at 
Daphne  did  not  protect. 

But  opposition  to  Hellenistic  religion  and  culture  3.  Legalism, 
had  been  developing,  notwithstanding  these  successes 
of  the  high  priest.  Along  with  the  drift  of  the  priest- 
hood toward  Hellenism  there  ran  a  counter-current  of 
legalistic  orthodoxy  —  the  third  great  characteristic  of 
the  period.  The  members  of  the  reactionary  party 
were  mostly  scribes  and  their  disciples,  who,  so  far 
from  desiring  any  share  in  Greek  civilisation,  opposed 
it  fanatically.  Historically  this  party  represented 
Jewish  spirit  quite  as  truly  as  the  priesthood.  From 
the  days  of  Ezra  the  genius  of  the  nation  had  been 
growing  scholastic.  The  study  of  the  Thorah,  though 
by  no  means  reaching  its  later  preeminence,  was  grow- 
ing more  intense  and  widespread.  To  men  filled  with 
the  spirit  of  Moses  and  the  prophets,  the  friends  of 
heathen  civilisation,  priests  though  they  might  be, 

i  2  Mace.  4  :  39-50. 


12     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  irre- 
pressible 
conflict. 


were  "transgressors"  and  "lawless."  Even  articles 
made  of  glass,  according  to  Jose  ben  Jochanan,  were 
defiling,  since  they  were  made  from  Gentile  soil.1  The 
true  Jew  was  told,  "Let  thy  house  be  a  place  of  as- 
sembly for  the  wise ;  powder  thyself  with  the  dust  of 
their  feet,"  and  every  Sabbath,  and  indeed  on  other 
days,  the  Law  was  expounded  in  the  synagogue  by  the 
professional  teachers. 

Under  such  inspiration  the  scribes  and  their  follow- 
ers slowly  grew  into  a  party  —  that  of  the  Chasidim, 
or  "Pious."  Scattered  abroad  over  the  little  state, 
dwellers  in  small  towns  rather  than  in  the  capital,2 
these  earnest  men  and  women  studied  and  cherished 
the  Thorah.  Important  as  they  were  later  to  prove, 
both  as  a  party  and  as  the  progenitors  of  parties,  their 
lack  of  organisation,  as  well  as  their  dispersion  and 
poverty,  weakened  their  influence  in  the  state,  and, 
as  with  all  incipient  popular  reforms,  conflict  and  per- 
secution were  needed  to  bring  the  movement  to  self- 
consciousness. 

And  in  Judea  there  was  developing  between  Hellen- 
ism and  Judaism  an  irrepressible  conflict  that  was 
destined  to  destroy  the  Hellenising  influence  of  the 
aristocracy,  give  the  nation  a  new  dynasty  and  mon- 
archy, reinstate  an  intense  and  uncompromising  Juda- 
ism, and  identify  scribism  with  patriotism. 

1  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  etc.,  75.    The  saying  is  also  attrib- 
uted to  Simon  ben  Shetach. 

2  This  conjecture  is  rendered  highly  probable  by  2  Mace.  4  : 
39,  40,  as  well  as  by  the  circumstances  of  the  Maccabean  revolt. 


CHAPTER  II 

ANTIOCHUS    EPIPHANES    AND    THE    LOSS    OF    RELIGIOUS 
LIBERTY  * 

THE  dominance  of  the  Hellenising  party  in  church  Taxation, 
and  state  brought  neither  peace  nor  prosperity.  Not 
only  were  the  morals  of  the  people  degenerating,  but 
the  taxes  levied  by  Syria  were  oppressive.  Before  the 
conquests  of  the  Asmoneans  the  Jews  were  essentially 
an  agricultural  people,2  and,  before  the  rise  of  the 
family  of  Joseph,  included  few,  if  any,  rich  men.  In 
the  absence  of  commerce,  any  considerable  middle  class 
could  hardly  have  existed,  and  the  nation  as  a  whole 
seems  to  have  been  composed  of  fellaheen  and  aristo- 
crats, priestly  or  professional.  The  two  classes  had 
different  origins,  different  ambitions,  and  very  possibly 
different  languages.3  The  supremacy  of  the  Hellenistic 
elements  of  the  aristocracy  was,  however,  calculated  to 
deepen  the  misery  of  the  masses,  since  what  little 
fellow-feeling  there  may  have  resulted  from  devotion 
to  the  law  was  of  necessity  lost. 

1  General  References :  Schiirer,  The  History  of  the  Jewish 
People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  199-218  ;  Ewald, 
History  of  Israel,  V.  293-302  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  I. 
457-487  ;  Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  viii.  chs. 
10-14. 

2  See  the  description  of  Jewish  life  in  the  first  century  of  the 
present  era,  Joseplms,  Ag.  Apion.  1  : 12. 

8  Conder,  Judas  Maccabceus,  21  f.  It  is  not  impossible  that 
heathen  practices  even  persisted  among  the  people.  For  their 
dishonesty,  cf .  Ecclus.  20  :  24. 

13 


14      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Classes  of 
taxes. 


Beginnings 
of  the  sus- 
icion of 
tiochus. 


pic 
An 


Upon  such  a  people  the  irresponsible  rule  of  the 
Syrians  sat  heavily.  As  wealth  was  almost  exclusively 
in  lands  and  cattle,  taxes  were  comparatively  easy  to 
collect,  and  of  necessity  fell  with  crushing  weight 
upon  the  unfortunate  fellaheen.  What  these  taxes 
were  can  be  seen  from  the  various  privileges  granted 
or  promised  by  Demetrius  and  other  kings.1  They 
included  a  tax  on  the  salt  mined  at  the  Dead  Sea,  a 
sum  supposed  to  be  equivalent  to  one-third  the  grain 
harvested  and  one-half  the  fruit,  and,  in  addition,  poll 
taxes  and  crown  taxes,  or  sums  equivalent  to  the 
value  of  crowns2  presented  to  the  monarchs,  as  well 
as  the  temple  tax  of  10,000  drachmas.  Further,  Syr- 
ian officers  had  the  right  to  seize  cattle  and  stores 
for  military  purposes,  as  well  as  to  enforce  the  corvee. 
When  one  recalls  that  all  this  was  in  addition  to  the 
tithes  and  gifts  required  of  the  people  in  support  of 
their  religion,  it  is  not  hard  to  realise  the  burden  upon 
the  people  as  a  whole.  Under  Antiochus  IV  fiscal 
oppression  was  increasing,  since  his  extravagance  as 
well  as  the  heavy  demands  of  Rome,  kept  Syria  always 
in  need  of  new  taxes.  These  were  collected  with  a 
severity  certainly  not  less  than  that  shown  previously 
by  Joseph  and  later  by  Cassius,  when  persons  and 
even  cities,  who  could  not  meet  the  demands  laid  upon 
them,  were  sold  into  slavery.3 

Doubtless  in  part  because  of  this  wretched  condition 
of  their  affairs,  due  to  an  irresponsible  king  and  an 
unsympathetic  local  government,  there  arose  a  disaffec- 

1  Thus  Antiochus  III,  Ant.  xii.  3:3;  Demetrius  I,  1  Mace. 
10  :  29-45.     Most  of  these  taxes  were  retained  by  the  Romans. 
See  Goldschmid,  "ImpOts  et  droits  de  douane  en  Jude"e  sous 
les  Romains,"  Revue  des  Etudes  juives,  XXXIV.  192. 

2  See  1  Mace.  13  : 36,  37  ;  2  Mace.  14  : 4 ;  and  Kautzsch,  in 
loco. 

3  Ant.  xii.  4:4;  xiv.  11  : 2. 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  15 

tion  on  the  part  of  many  Jews  and  a  suspicion  of  the 
Jews  on  the  part  of  the  king. 

In  about  172  B.C.  Antiochus  became  involved  in  a 
dispute  with  Egypt  over  the  possession  of  Palestine, 
and  war  immediately  broke  out  between  the  two 
nations,  he  himself  acting  on  the  offensive,1  and 
conducted  one  campaign  each  year  between  171-68. 
In  the  second  of  these  four  campaigns  he  had 
conquered  practically  the  whole  of  Egypt  outside  of 
Alexandria,2  when  he  suddenly  started  north,  possibly 
because  of  the  interference  of  Rome.  As  he  came  into 
Palestine  he  learned  that  Jason,  whom,  he  had  deposed, 
had  shut  up  Menelaus  in  the  citadel,  and,  although 
driven  from  the  city,  was  at  the  head  of  a  revolt. 
This  news,  coupled  with  his  natural  suspicion  of  the 
Egyptian  leanings  of  the  Judaistic  party,3  caused  him 
to  march  upon  Jerusalem.4  He  sacked  the  city,  massa-  First  sack 
cred  or  enslaved  large  numbers  of  its  inhabitants,  and,  byJ 
although  he  made  no  attack  upon  Judaism,  with  Mene-  chus. 
laus  as  his  guide  he  entered  into  the  sanctuary,  where 
he  is  said  to  have  found  a  statue  of  Moses  riding  on 
an  ass.5  He  robbed  the  temple  of  its  treasure,  and 
carried  off  to  Antioch  the  golden  altar,  the  candlestick, 

1  The  origin  of  the  dispute  with  Egypt  over  Palestine  is  as 
follows:    Antiochus  III,  the  Great,  had  given    his    daughter 
Cleopatra  in  marriage  to  Ptolemy  V  (Epiphanes),  promising  as 
her  dowry  Coele-Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine.    Since  the  Jews 
congratulated  Ptolemy  V  at  the  birth  of  his  son  (Ant.  xii.  4:7), 
it  would  appear  as  if  at  that  time  Judea  was  in  the  possession 
of  Egypt.     But  under  Seleucus  IV  Palestine  was  again  subject 
to  Syria,  and  in  181  Ptolemy  died  while  attempting  to  regain 
it.     On  the  death  of  Cleopatra  the  guardians  of  her  son  de- 
manded the  territory  in  accordance  with  the  promise  of  Antio- 
chus III.     This  was  refused,  and  war  ensued. 

2  1  Mace.  1  : 18,  19  ;  Ant.  xii.  5  : 2. 

3  For  the  attitude  of  the  Egyptian  kings  to  the  Jews,  see  Ma- 
haffy,  Empire  of  the  Ptolemies,  340-342. 

*  2  Mace.  2  : 1-11.  *  2  Mace.  5  : 15. 


16      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Antiochus 
attempts  to 
destroy  the 
anti-Hellen- 
istic party. 


The  policy 
of  Antio- 
chus. 


the  table  of  shewbread,  the  cups  and  sacred  vessels, 
and  even  scaled  off  the  gilt  with  which  parts  of  the 
temple  were  overlaid.1  Then  he  left  the  city  in  the 
control  of  Menelaus,  who  was  supported  by  Syrian 
officials  and  troops. 

These  acts  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  were  but  the 
beginning  of  a  desperate  attempt  to  extirpate  the 
anti-Hellenistic  party.  Such  an  attempt  was,  in  a 
measure,  due  to  the  peculiarities  of  the  king  himself. 
Brave,  generous,2  and  to  a  considerable  degree  possessed 
of  cultivated  tastes,  he  was  at  the  same  time  eccentric, 
passionate,  and  possessed  of  immeasurable  self-conceit. 
Added  to  these  personal  elements  were  the  suspected 
sympathies  of  the  Chasidim  with  Egypt.3  But  doubt- 
less with  even  greater  truth  it  may  be  ascribed  to  an 
unbalanced  determination  to  consolidate  and  prolong 
the  Syrian  state  by  the  establishment  of  a  common 
civilisation.  All  should  be  one  people.4  Had  the 
already  aggressive  Hellenising  movement  been  allowed 
to  run  its  course  among  the  Jews,  it  is  not  impossible 
(though,  on  the  whole,  in  the  light  of  Jewish  history, 
not  probable,  since  such  heathen  tendencies  would 
most  likely  have  produced  a  revival  of  prophetism) 

1  1  Mace.  1  :  20-24.    According  to  Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  5  : 3, 
Antiochus  at  this  time  plundered  Jerusalem,  but  did  not  carry 
off  the  sacred  vessels  until  two  years  later.     He  has  probably 
confused  two  accounts  of  the  event.    The  conjecture  of  Mahaffy, 
Empire  of  the  Ptolemies,  341,  that  this  punishment  was  due  to 
some  act  of  disloyalty  of  the  Jews  during  the  Egyptian  cam- 
paign of  Antiochus,  is  not  warranted  by  any  known  facts. 

2  See,  for  instance,  his  weeping  over  the  death  of  Onias  III, 
2  Mace.  4  :  37. 

8  Polybius,  xxvi. ,  gives  an  interesting  account  of  his  con- 
tradictory traits.  He  was  fond  of  rude  practical  jokes,  and  of 
going  about  incognito  in  search  of  adventures.  It  was  these 
traits  that  won  him  the  title  of  Epimanes — the  Mad,  in  the 
place  of  Epiphanes  —  the  Illustrious. 

*  1  Mace.  1  : 41. 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANE8  17 

that  Judaism,  like  other  ethnic  faiths,  would  have 
succumbed.  But  here  the  king's  own  character  made 
patience  out  of  the  question  and  precipitated  a  struggle 
that  was  not  to  cease  until  the  weak  city-state  was 
unexpectedly  able  to  break  free  from  a  suddenly  de- 
cadent empire,  and  the  despised  anti-Hellenistic  party 
became  supreme. 

This  new  policy  of  Antiochus  was  inaugurated  by 
an  attack  upon  Jerusalem,  and  again  the  occasion 
of  the  attack  lay  in  the  king's  Egyptian  wars.  In 
168  B.C.  he  had  all  but  conquered  Egypt,  when  the 
Eoman  legate,  Popilius,  following  the  anti-Syrian 
policy  which  Eome  then  favoured,  unexpectedly  or- 
dered him  to  return  to  Syria.  Antiochus  demanded 
time  for  deliberation.  The  Eoman  drew  a  circle  about 
the  king  with  his  staff  and  ordered  him  to  "  deliberate 
there."  The  king  deliberated  —  and  retreated ! l 

But  now  more  than  ever  did  he  see  danger  in  having  Second  sack 
on  his  southern  frontier  an  unassimilated  nation  like 
the  Jews,  among  whom  a  strong  anti-Syrian  party 
might  easily  develop,  if  indeed  it  were  not  already  in 
existence.  He  determined  once  and  for  all  either  to 
convert  or  exterminate  those  of  their  numbers  whose 
devotion  to  Judaism  argued  disloyalty  to  Syria.  In- 
deed, it  is  not  impossible  that  for  purely  political  rea- 
sons he  planned  to  exterminate  the  Jews  of  Jerusalem 
as  a  whole,  and  to  replace  them  by  heathen  colonists.2 
With  such  a  combination  of  purposes  —  political,  reli- 
gious, and  ambitious  —  he  got  possession  of  Jerusalem 

1  Polybius,  29  : 27  ;  Livy,  45  : 12. 

2  So  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  206  n. ,  on  the  basis  of  a  comparison 
of  1  Mace.  1 : 38  with  1  Mace.  1 :  30-32  and  2  Mace.  5  : 24.    Stade 
(Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,  II.  321)  holds  that  the  financial  straits 
of  Syria  resulting  from  the  Roman  wars  and  the  pressure  brought 
to  bear  upon  Antiochus  by  the  Jewish  Hellenistic  party  were 
the  two  causes  of  the  persecution. 


18      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

by  treachery,  again  sacked  and  burned  it,  plundered 
the  temple,  massacred  many  of  the  citizens,  carried  off 
ten  thousand  as  slaves,  threw  down  the  walls,  strength- 
ened the  acropolis  until  it  was  a  citadel  which  com- 
pletely commanded  the  temple  and  the  city,  and  placed 
in  it  a  strong  Syrian  garrison.1 

Persecution  Again  this  was  but  a  beginning.  For  the  first  time 
in  the  history  of  the  Graeco-Roman  world  there  began 
a  war  of  extermination  of  a  religion.  Its  victims  were 
those  who  clung  to  Judaism,  and  above  all  the  Pious. 
The  observance  of  all  Jewish  rites,  especially  the  Sab- 
bath and  circumcision,  was  punished  by  death.  Jewish 
worship  was  abolished.  Heathen  altars  were  erected 
in  all  the  cities  of  Judea,  and  in  the  temple  groves 
were  planted,2  and  a  small  altar  to  Jupiter,  the  Abom- 
ination of  Desolation,  was  erected  upon  the  great  altar 
of  burnt-offering.  There  in  December  168  B.C.  a  sow 
was  sacrificed  and  the  desecration  was  complete.3 

1  The  location  of  this  citadel,  which  played  so  prominent  a 
part  in  the  history  of  the  next  generation,  is  one  of  the  numer- 
ous puzzles  of  the  topography  of  Jerusalem.    Schtirer  (Div.  1. 1. 
207  n.)  thinks  it  "an  incontestable  result  of  modern  investiga- 
tion that  it  lay  on  the  southern  slope  of  the  eastern  hill,"  i.e.  on 
Ophel.     The  recent  investigations  as  to  the  original  rock  forma- 
tion seem  rather  to  favour  the  site  of  the  Palestine  Exploration 
Fund  map,  that  is,  on  the  northern  end  of  the  western  and 
higher  hill,  at  about  the  spot  now  occupied  by  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre.     Dr.  Schick  has  recently  found  evidence 
that  the  rock  has  been  cut  down  (Pal.  Ex.  Fund  Quar.,  July, 
1898)  at  that  point.     It  is  hardly  possible  to  see  either  how  a 
citadel  on  Ophel  could  have  commanded  the  temple,  or  that 
there  ever  was  a  valley  of  any  considerable  size  between  it  and 
the  temple.     Compare  1  Mace.  4  :  37,  60  ;  5  :  54  ;  6  :  62  ;  7  : 33 
with   1    Mace.   1  :  33  ;    14  :  36  ;   4:2;    9  :  52  ;    10  :  32  ;    13  :  52  ; 
14:7;   2  Mace.  15:31,  35. 

2  This  is  the  most  probable  interpretation  of  1  Mace.  4  :  38. 

8  On  this  meaning  of  Dan.  9  : 27  as  Baal  Samen,  i.e.  Zeus, 
see  Nestle,  Zeit.  fur  alt.  Wissen.,  1884,  248.     Josephus  says 


19 

Then  began  the  brief  period  of  Jewish  martyrs. 
Royal  officers  went  about  the  land  to  see  that  the  com- 
mands of  the  king  were  obeyed.  But  while  many  de- 
serted their  faith,  and  the  Samaritans  obtained  by 
petition  the  right  to  erect  a  temple  to  Zeus  upon  Mt. 
Gerizim,1  the  Chasidim  and  their  sympathisers  pre- 
ferred death  to  denial.  Old  men  and  youths  were  Jewish 
whipped  with  rods  and  torn  to  pieces,  mothers  were  martyrs- 
crucified  with  the  infant  boys  they  had  circumcised, 
strangled  and  hanging  about  their  necks.  To  possess 
a  copy  of  the  law  was  to  be  punished  by  death.  It 
would  be  hard  to  name  a  greater  crisis  in  the  history 
of  the  Jews,  or  indeed  of  any  people.  To  compare  it 
with  the  fortunes  of  the  Low  Countries  during  the 
reign  of  Philip  II  of  Spain  is  to  discredit  neither 
brave  little  land.2 

But  the  persecution  only  intensified  the  devo-  Results  of 
tion  of  the  Chasidim  to  their  Thorah.  They  were  J^6^ 
ready  to  die  rather  than  surrender  such  few  copies  as  opment  of 
they  might  own.  Indeed,  as  later  in  the  case  of  the 
Christians  under  Decius,  persecution  itself  helped  them 
to  draw  more  clearly  the  distinction  between  their 
sacred  books  and  those  that  were  not  worthy  of  su- 
preme sacrifice ;  and  during  these  dark  days  we  may 
place  the  first  beginning  of  that  choice  between  religious 
books  which  afterward  was  to  result  in  the  fixing  of 
the  third  group  or  stratum  of  books  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible3  — the  «  Sacred  Writings." 

From  the  midst  of  this  persecution,  also,  the  hopes 
of  the  Pious  leaped  out  in  vision  and  prophecy.     In 

( Ant.  xii.  5:4)  that  the  Jews  were  forced  to  offer  swine  every 
day  upon  altars  outside  of  Jerusalem. 

1  Ant.  xii.  5  :  5. 

2  Here  belong  the  stories  of  2  Mace.  6  : 18-7  :  42.     The  chief 
source  is  1  Mace.  1  :  29-64. 

8  Ryle,  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  125  1 


20     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  litera- 
ture of  the 
persecution. 
Judith, 
Daniel, 
Enoch. 


The  Messi- 
anic hope. 


the  books  of  Daniel  and  Judith  they  pictured  the  de- 
liverances wrought  by  Jehovah  for  those  who  kept  his 
law  in  disobedience  of  some  monstrous  demand  for  uni- 
versal idolatry,  and  traced  the  rise  and  fall  of  empires 
till  the  kingdom  of  the  saints  should  come.1  Similar 
religious  trust  burst  forth  in  lyric  poetry,2  in  which 
the  misery  of  the  land  is  painted  no  more  vividly  than 
the  faith  that  the  true  Israel  is  the  flock  of  Jehovah's 
pasture.  Even  more  in  the  Visions  of  Enoch  (Chs. 
83-90)  does  the  heart  of  a  pious  Israel  find  expression. 
To  their  unknown  author  the  Chasidim  were  lambs 
killed  and  mutilated  by  fierce  birds,  while  the  apostate 
Jews  looked  on  unmoved.  But  he  saw  deliverance  as 
well.  The  Lord  of  the  sheep  should  seat  himself  upon 
a  throne  "  in  a  pleasant  land,"  and  cast  the  oppressors 
and  the  apostates  into  a  fiery  abyss ;  but  the  faithful 
martyrs  should  be  brought  to  a  new  temple,  and  their 
eyes  should  be  opened  to  see  the  good,  and  at  last 
they  should  be  like  Messiah  himself.  For  God  would 
send  his  own  anointed  to  his  servants'  aid,  and 
he  should  found  a  new  kingdom,  not  in  heaven, 
but  upon  the  earth.3  Indeed,  if  it  be  true  that  certain 
psalms  belong  to  this  period,4  these  earnest  souls  from 

1  Dan.  7  :  8,  20-25  ;   8  :  9-12,  23-25  ;   9  :  26.     See  Kautzsch, 
History  of  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  (Eng.  trans.), 
138-141;  Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament;  Wilde- 
boer,  Die  Litteratur  des  Alien  Testaments,  435  f . ;  Streane,  Age 
of  the  Maccabees,  App.  C ;  Kennedy,   The  Book  of  Daniel. 
Literature  is  given  in  the  article  by  E.  L.  Curtis,  in  Hastings, 
Dictionary  of  the  Bible.    It  is  not  impossible  that  our  present 
book  of  Daniel  contains  material  dating  from  an  earlier  period. 

2  As  possibly  Pss.  44,  74,  79,  115-118,  133,  149. 

8  Schtirer,  Geschichte  desjildischen  Volkes  (3d  ed.),  III.  508. 

*  See  Kautzsch,  History  of  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment (Eng.  trans.),  147  ;  Cheyne,  Origin  and  Eeligious  Contents 
of  the  Psalter,  App.  I.  and  Lects.  1-5.  To  this  period  Kautzsch, 
Reuss,  Graetz,  Bloch,  and  others  assign  Esther,  but  not  on 
wholly  satisfactory  grounds.  See  Driver,  Wildeboer  (  Canon} , 
and  Ryle  {Canon). 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  21 

out  of  the  depths  of  their  sufferings  proclaimed  a  Mes- 
sianic time  in  which  a  revived  and  sanctified  Israel 
would  give  the  true  religion  to  all  the  world. 

Sustained  by  these  bright  visions  —  the  seed  of  so 
much  later  Jewish  hope  —  the  Chasidim  at  first  awaited 
Jehovah's  time.  They  could  die  as  martyrs,  but  they 
would  not  live  as  soldiers.  But  deliverance  was  to 
come  by  the  sword,  and  events  were  to  make  this 
plain,  even  to  the  Chasidim.  For  out  of  this  persecu- 
tion arose  the  Judea  of  Judas  Maccabaeus. 

The  misery  of  the  land  could  not  have  continued  Uprising  of 
long  when,  in  accordance  with  the  king's  dragonnade, 
Appelles,  a  royal  officer,  came  to  Modein,  a  small  town 
upon  the  hills  of  Judea  overlooking  the  maritime  plain.1 
There  he  ordered  all  the  inhabitants  to  a  heathen 
sacrifice.  Among  those  who  answered  his  summons 
were  Mattathias,  the  head  of  a  priestly  family  sup- 
posedly descendants  of  one  Chasinon  or  Asmon,  and 
his  five  sons,  —  John,  Simon,  Judas,  Eleazar,  and  Jon- 
athan. They  were  not  members  of  the  Chasidim  but 
represented  the  wider  circle  of  those  whose  devotion  to 
the  Law  had  been  deeply  stirred  by  the  persecution. 
As  Mattathias  came  to  the  little  gathering  the  royal 
officer  promised  him  a  reward  for  conformity.  In- 
stantly the  old  priest  with  a  great  shout  of  protest 
killed  the  Jew  who  was  attempting  to  offer  a  sacrifice, 
and  his  sons  struck  down  the  officer.  Then,  after  lev- 
elling the  altar  with  the  ground,  the  entire  family  fled 
to  the  mountains.2  There  they  were  joined  by  groups 
of  the  Chasidim,  already  fugitives,  and  by  other  men 
less  religious  but  even  more  ready  to  oppose  oppression.3 

1  El-Medijeh,  east  of  Lydda.     Survey  of  Western  Palestine, 
Memoirs,  II.  341-352. 

2  1  Mace.  2  :  15-28. 

8  The  Asmoneans,  or  Maccabeans,  were  not  the  same  as 
the  Chasidim,  though  now  the  two  parties  were  united,  but  not 


22      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Fanatical  Ko  sooner  was  the  affair  at  Modein  known  than  the 

of  Vthe°n  Syrians  undertook  to  punish  the  rebels,  and  the  fariati- 
Chasidim.  Cal  devotion  of  some  of  the  Chasidim  to  the  Sabbath 
for  a  time  threatened  disaster.  On  one  occasion  a 
group  allowed  themselves  to  be  slaughtered  by  the 
Syrians  rather  than  break  the  Sabbath  defending 
themselves.  But  the  strong  common  sense  of  Matta- 
thias  convinced  even  these  zealots  that  such  devotion 
was  ill-advised,1  and  other  bands  of  the  Pious 'sub- 
mitted to  the  stern  necessities  that  were  laid  upon 
religion.  Then,  with  his  troop  of  fanatical,  undisci- 
plined, and  ill-armed  followers,  Mattathias  began  a 
Outbreak  of  religious  war.  Up  and  down  Judea  the  wild  troops 
ranged,  avoiding  the  larger  cities,  hiding  by  day,  at- 
tacking  by  night,2  "  smiting  sinners  in  their  anger  and 
lawless  men  in  their  wrath," 3  pulling  down  heathen 
altars,  forcibly  circumcising  children,  pursuing  after 
the  "sons  of  pride,"  and,  as  far  as  they  were  able, 
guaranteeing  safety  in  the  observance  of  the  Law. 

For  perhaps  a  year  the  old  man  was  able  to  main- 
tain this  rough  life,  and  then  he  died  (166  B.C.),  urging 
his  sons  to  "  recompense  fully  the  heathen  and  to  regard 
the  commandments  of  the  Law."  The  conduct  of  the 
struggle  he  bequeathed  to  Judas,  his  third  son,  but 
recommended  Simon  as  a  counsellor.  His  followers 
buried  him  in  the  family  tomb  at  Modein,  and  pre- 
pared for  the  greater  struggle  which  was  clearly  before 
them.4 

fused.  To  speak  of  the  Chasidim  as  nationalists  is  quite  as 
inaccurate  as  to  speak  of  the  Maccabees  as  religious  fanatics 
(Wellhausen,  Pharisder  und  Sadducaer,  79-86).  Each  party 
was  devoted  to  the  Law,  but  the  one  was  essentially  composed 
of  Scribes,  while  the  other  was  not. 

1  1  Mace.  2  :  29-41.  3  1  Mace.  2  : 42-48. 

a  2  Mace.  8:7.  4  1  Mace.  2  : 49-70. 


CHAPTER  III 

JUDAS    MACCABEUS    AND    THE    REESTABLISHMENT    Off 
RELIGIOUS    LIBERTY    (165-161    B.C.1) 

THE  condition  of  Judea  when  thus  Judas  succeeded  Real  charac« 
to  the  captaincy  of  a  religious  guerilla  war  was  briefly  * 

this  :  On  the  one  side,  the  legitimate  political  powers, 
the  high  priest  and  the  Syrian  captain-general,  together 
with  a  considerable  number  of  the  more  aristocratic 
citizens,  were  united  in  the  endeavour  to  force  the 
nation  into  submission  to  Syria  and  into  conformity 
with  the  religion  of  the  rest  of  the  known  world.  On 
the  other,  was  a  force  of  insurgents  under  Judas,  made 
up  of  two  very  different  groups  of  men, —  the  fanatical 
Chasidim,  and  the  patriotic  adventurers  constituting 
the  party  of  the  Asmoneans  or  Maccabees.  Between 
these  two  parties  in  the  approaching  civil  war  was  the 
great  mass  of  the  people,  doubtless  at  heart  favourable 
toward  Judaism,  but  indifferent  to  calls  to  heroic 
sacrifice,  poor  and  unarmed,  certain  to  be  oppressed 
whichever  side  won,  and  consequently  ready  to  submit 
to  whichever  party  might  for  the  moment  be  the 
victor.  To  speak  of  an  uprising  of  the  people  is  as 
misleading  as  in  the  case  of  England  during  the  wars 
of  the  Eoses. 

Judas   the  Hammer  —  for   such   seems  to  be  the 

1  General  References  :   Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  219-233  ;   Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  I.  488-508  ;  Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel, 
bk.  viii.  chs.  15-17  ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  306-323. 
23 


24      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Judas  Mac-  most  likely  meaning  of  his  title *  —  is  the  ideal  of  the 
cabaeus.  writer  of  1  Maccabees  —  "a  lion  in  his  deeds,  and 
a  lion's  whelp  roaring  for  prey."  And  it  must  be 
confessed  that  not  even  Scotland  can  boast  of  a  more 
typical  border  patriot,  or  one  who  better  combined 
foresight  with  recklessness,  genuine  military  ability 
with  personal  daring. 

Early  sue-  Desperate  as  the  position  of  the  rebels  really  was, 
revolt  °fthe  *ke  uPrising  at  its  beginning  met  with  great  good 
fortune.  Apolloiiius,  the  commander  of  the  Syrian 
forces  in  Judea  and  Samaria,2  was  completely  defeated 
and  he  himself  was  killed,  Judas  thereafter  wearing 
his  sword.3  Shortly  afterward  Seron,  perhaps  the 
commander  of  the  Syrian  forces  in  the  maritime  plain, 
attempted  to  punish  Judas  and  came  up  toward  Jeru- 
salem by  the  way  of  the  Beth-horons.4  But  Judas 
never  faltered.  Appealing  to  his  followers  to  remem- 
ber their  families  and  their  laws,  he  rushed  down 
upon  the  Syrians  as  they  were  crowded  into  a  nar- 
row defile,  routed  them,  and  pursued  them  into  the 
plain  with  great  slaughter.5 

1  This  seems  the  outcome  of  the  voluminous  discussion.    Cur- 
tiss,  The  Name  Machabee,  holds  that  it  more  properly  signifies 
44  the  extinguisher  "  (Is.  43  : 17),  and  earlier  writers  have  thought 
it  derived  from  the  initial  letters  of  the  watchword  Mi  kamakha 
baalim  Yahweh  (Who  is  like  Thee  among  the  gods,  Jehovah?). 
The  chief  objection  to  the  former  view  is  orthographic,  and  to 
the  latter,  the  utter  absence  of  any  evidence  that  such  a  watch- 
word was  ever  used.     There  is  some  difficulty  in  "  Hammer," 
as  the  Maqqabhah  is  a  small  implement,  hardly  fit  for  war. 
But  such  an  objection  is  far  from  decisive. 

2  Ant.  xii.  7  : 1 ;  1  Mace.  1  :  29  ;  2  Mace.  5  :  24. 
8  1  Mace.  3  : 10-12. 

4  Beit-&r  el  Foka  and  Beit-ur  el   Tahta,  at  the  upper  and 
lower  ends  of  the  defile  that  constitutes  an  important  approach 
to  Jerusalem.     The  Lower  Beth-horon  is  perhaps  sixteen  miles 
northwest  from  Jerusalem. 

5  1  Mace.  3  : 16-24. 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS  25 

Meanwhile  the  finances  of  Syria  had  grown  so  des-  Plans  of 
perately  bad  that  Antiochus  undertook  an  expedition  Antloclms- 
against  the  Persians  to  collect  overdue  tribute.     He 
therefore  divided  his  forces,  giving  one-half  to  Lysias, 
of  the  blood  royal,  whom  he  made  governor-general  of 
the  region  between  the  Euphrates  and  Egypt.    Lysias 
was  to  despatch  at  once  a  large  force l  against  Judas, 
to  drive  out  the  Jews,  and  divide  their  land  among 
colonists. 

Lysias  put  three  generals  —  Ptolemy,  Nicanor,  and 
Gorgias  —  in  charge  of  the  army  of  invasion  and  sent 
them  southward,  so  confident  of  victory  that  slave- 
dealers  accompanied  them  in  anticipation  of  a  vast 
supply  of  captives.  Apparently  the  purpose  of  Anti- 
ochus was  no  longer  to  hellenise  but  to  exterminate 
the  Jews  as  a  nation. 

The  news  of  the  approach  of  this  large  force  brought  The  battle 
dismay  to  the  Jews,  but  at  the  call  of  Judas  large  of  Emmaus 
numbers  of  them  gathered  at  Mizpeh,  the  ancient 
sanctuary.  There  they  fasted,  put  on  sackcloth  and 
ashes,  and  over  their  ancient  scriptures,  upon  which 
the  persecutors  had  drawn  images  of  their  idols,2  they 
prayed  and  offered  the  gifts  which  were  properly  the 
dues  of  the  priests.3  Sending  away  all  those  excused 
from  military  duty  by  the  Law,4  as  well  as  all  others  who 
might  be  tempted  to  flee,  Judas  organised  those  that  were 
left  by  appointing  leaders  of  thousands  and  hundreds 
and  fifties.  Thus  prepared  he  waited  upon  the  south 
side  of  Emmaus,  near  which  the  Syrians  had  also 
camped.5  Each  army  attempted  to  surprise  the  other 

1  Forty  thousand  foot  and  seven  thousand  horse,  according 
to  1  Mace.  3 :  32-39,  though  this  is  probably  an  exaggeration, 
as  the  Syriac  version  reads  ten  thousand. 

2  So  Kirkpatrick,  Journal  of  Philology,  xiv.  112. 

8  1  Mace.  3  :  46-54.  *  Deut.  20  :  5-8. 

5  1  Mace.  3  : 40,  57.     This  Emmaus  certainly  was  not  the 


26      NEW   TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

by  night.  Gorgias,  with  a  force  of  five  thousand  infan- 
try and  a  thousand  horse,  succeeded  in  reaching  the 
camp  of  Judas,  but  only  to  find  it  deserted.  For 
Judas,  perceiving  the  movement,  had  simultaneously 
marched  upon  the  Syrians.  At  daybreak  he  fell  upon 
them,  utterly  defeated  them,  and  pursued  them  to 
Gazara,1  Azotus,  and  Jamnia.  Returning  to  the  cap- 
tured camp,  the  Jews,  without  stopping  to  plunder  it, 
waited  for  the  return  of  Gorgias.  When  that  general 
appeared  and  saw  his  camp  in  flames  and  the  Jews 
drawn  up  ready  for  attack,  he  at  once  retreated  to 
the  Philistine  cities,  while  the  Jews  passed  the  Sab- 
bath in  celebration  and  thanksgiving.2 

Yet  Judas  did  not  feel  himself  strong  enough  to  re- 
take Jerusalem,  if  indeed  there  were  not  other  forces 
of  Syrians  to  be  driven  from  the  land.3     It  was  not  till 
the  next  year  (165  B.C.),  however,  that  Lysias  came 
with  another  huge  army ;  but  instead  of  coming  into 
Judea  from  the  north  or  west,  he  made  a  detour  and  came 
up  through  Idumea  and   the  broad  wady  commanded 
Battle  of        by  Bethzur,  twenty  miles  south  of  Jerusalem  on  the 
Bethzur.        roa(j  to  Hebron.4    There  Judas  met  him  with  a  force 
of  ten  thousand  men   and  won   a  decisive  victory. 

town  mentioned  in  Luke  24  : 13,  for  that  was  not  in  the  plain 
country,  but  near  Jerusalem.  It  probably  occupied  the  site  of 
Amwas,  the  Nicopolis  of  the  Middle  Ages,  at  the  base  of  the 
Judean  hills,  about  twenty-two  miles  from  Jerusalem. 

1  Tell-el-Jezer,  Pal.  Ex.  Fund  Quar.,  1875. 

2  1  Mace.  3  :  55-4  :  25  ;  cf.  2  Mace.  8  :  26,  27. 

8  See  2  Mace.  8  :  30-33,  where  Judas  seems  to  have  won  vic- 
tories over  Timotheus  and  Bacchides,  as  well  as  to  have  killed 
Philarches  and  Callisthenes.  But  it  is  impossible  to  interpret 
this  passage  satisfactorily. 

*  The  modern  Beit-Sur.  See  Pal.  Ex.  Fund  Quar.,  January, 
1895.  It  is  characteristic  of  Renan  to  doubt  whether  this  battle 
ever  occurred.  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  viii.  (Am. 
ed.  316  n.). 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS  27 

Lysias  retreated  to  Antioch  to  raise  new  forces,  and  as 
the  Syrian  garrisons  scattered  over  the  land  were  too 
weak  to  face  Judas  and  his  veterans,  the  land  was 
momentarily  free. 

Then  it  was  that  the  real  purpose  of  the  revolt  could  Restoration 
be  accomplished.  Fresh  from  its  victory  at  Bethzur, 
the  army  went  to  Jerusalem  to  restore  the  temple.  A 
detachment  was  sent  to  fight  against  the  garrison  in 
the  citadel,  while,  amidst  great  lamentation  over  the 
burned  gates  and  profaned  courts  and  altar,  Judas  ap- 
pointed such  priests  as  had  not  yielded  to  the  Helle- 
nistic madness  to  cleanse  the  holy  building  and  to  throw 
all  polluted  stones  into  "  an  unclean  place  "  —  possibly 
the  valley  of  Hinnom.  At  the  ancient  altar  of  burnt 
offering  they  hesitated.  It  had  been  polluted,  but 
it  was  still  sacred.  It  could  neither  be  used  nor 
thrown  away,  and  in  their  uncertainty  they  took  it 
solemnly  apart  and  stored  its  unhewn  stones  in  one  of 
the  chambers  of  the  inner  court,  just  off  holy  ground, 
where  they  might  rest  until  some  prophet  should  come 
who  could  decide  as  to  their  final  destination.1  Then 
they  erected  a  new  altar  that  reproduced  the  old,  re- 
built the  dilapidated  temple,  rooted  up  the  groves  in 
the  courts,  made  new  temple  furniture,  restored  the 
candlestick,  the  altar  of  incense,  and  the  table  for  the 
shewbread.  At  last  there  came  the  day  when  incense 
burned  again  upon  the  altar,  the  lamps  were  relighted, 
the  great  curtains  were  rehung.  As  the  dawn  broke 
•on  the  next  morning,  the  25th  of  Chisleu,  165,  three 
years  to  a  day  since  its  predecessor  had  been  desecrated, 
sacrifice  was  offered  upon  the  great  altar,  and  during 

1  1  Mace.  4  : 46  ;  Middoth  1  :  6.  The  reverence  with  which 
the  polluted,  altar  was  held  is  seen  in  the  Talmudical  statement 
that  the  priestly  course  of  Bilgah  was  deprived  of  its  chamber 
at  the  temple  because  the  daughter  of  one  of  its  members,  in 
a  frenzy  of  hatred  for  the  heathen  god,  kicked  the  altar, 


28      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  feast  of 
the  Dedica- 
tion. 


Political 
plans  of 
Judas. 


Perils  of  the 
Jews  among 
the  heathen. 


eight  days  of  delirious  rejoicing  the  people  again  con- 
secrated the  great  area  to  Jehovah.  From  that  day 
to  this  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  —  or  the  Feast  of 
Lights  —  has  been  celebrated.1 

But  the  Jews  had  not  achieved  independence.  They 
had  simply  regained  an  opportunity  for  worship- 
ping Jehovah.  The  Syrian  garrison  still  overlooked 
the  temple  from  Akra,  and  political  independence  was 
probably  not  wanted  by  the  people  as  a  whole.  One 
thing  only  was  certain:  now  that  the  temple  had 
been  reconsecrated,  no  Syrian  should  be  permitted 
again  to  seize  the  capital.  The  plans  of  Judas  were 
more  far-reaching  than  the  mere  maintenance  of  the 
position  thus  far  gained,  and  he  strengthened  the 
city's  walls,  built  huge  towers,  refortified  Beth-zur  on 
the  southern  frontier  and  garrisoned  it  with  Jewish 
troops.2  The  marauding  Arabs  on  the  frontier  were 
taught  respect  for  the  new  power.  The  Idumeans 
were  defeated  at  Akrabattene,3  the  otherwise  unknown 
Balanites  were  burned  alive  in  their  own  towers,  while 
their  Greek  general,  Timotheus,  was  unable  to  save 
the  Ammonites  from  utter  defeat  and  the  loss  of  Jazer 
with  its  villages.4 

As  happened  again  in  the  fearful  year  66  A.D.,  the 
report  of  the  Jews'  uprising  and  these  successes  stirred 
to  madness  the  neighbouring  heathen  regions  into 
which  the  Jews  had  pushed.  The  inhabitants  of  Gil- 
ead  undertook  to  exterminate  the  Jews  living  east  of 
Jordan.  At  the  same  time  appeals  came  from  the 

1 1  Mace.  4  :  36-59  ;  2  Mace.  10 : 1-8  ;  Ant.  xii.  7  :  6,  7.  Com- 
pare John  10  : 22  ;  Stanley,  Jewish  Church  (Am.  ed.),  iii.  SOS- 
SOS. 

2  Conder,  Judas  Maccabceus,  109,  calls  attention  to  the  fact 
that  Judea  corresponded  very  nearly  in  extent  to  the  Christian 
kingdom  of  Jerusalem  under  its  latest  kings. 

3  Not  the  toparchy  Akrabattene. 

*  Possibly  es-S&r,  or  Beit-Zera,  four  miles  from  Heshbon. 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS  29 

Jewish  colonists  in  Galilee  for  protection  against  ex- 
peditions being  formed  in  Ptolemais  and  other  Syrian 
cities.  Judaism  was  in  danger  throughout  the  land. 
Judas  acted  promptly.  Simon  and  three  thousand 
men  were  sent  to  bring  the  Jews  from  Galilee,  while 
Judas  and  Jonathan  with  eight  thousand  men  went 
into  Gilead.  The  rest  of  the  army  was  left  to  defend 
Jerusalem  and  maintain  order. 

Both  of  the  expeditions  were  successful.     Simon, 
after  considerable  fighting,  rescued  the  Galilean  Jews 
and  brought  them   to   safety  in  Judea.     Judas,  by 
swift  marches,  on  the  fifth  day  surprised  the  enemy 
just  as  they  were  attacking  the  last  refuge  of  the 
Jews  east  of  Judea,  defeated  them,  burned  several  of 
their  cities,  and  at  Eaphana — that  lost  city  of  the 
Decapolis  —  destroyed  a  confederacy  organised  by  one 
Timotheus,  and  burned  the  fugitives  together  with  the 
temple  in  which  they  had  taken  refuge.     But  his  po- 
sition was  too  precarious  to  allow  the  raid  to  lead  into 
conquest.     Gathering  all  the  Jews  together  he  forced  The  vie- 
his  way  with  them  through  the  city  Ephron,  which  at-  j^s  be- 
tempted  to  shut  him  out  from  the  roads  and  fords  it  yond  Jor- 
cominanded,  and  at  last  brought  them  amidst  great  dan' 
rejoicing  to  Jerusalem  and  safety.1 

There  he  was  forced  to  make  good  losses  caused 
by  the  reckless  disobedience  of  his  lieutenants,  and 
then  destroyed  Hebron,  and  Azotus  with  its  altars  and 
its  gods.2  Then  he  began  a  siege  of  the  citadel  (163- 
162  B.C.).  But  the  people,  especially  the  Chasidim, 
had  had  enough  of  fighting.  They  had  regained  the 
temple  and  were  content.  Almost  at  this  moment, 
also,  Syria  was  able  to  deal  vigorously  with  the  revolt. 

1 1  Mace.  5  : 1-54  ;  Ant.  xii.  8  : 1-5.  It  is  impossible  to  locate 
the  various  small  cities  Judas  captured,  such  as  Casphor,  Maked, 
Bosor,  Malli. 

*  1  Mace.  5  :  55  sq. 


30      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  had  found  little  wealth 
Death  of  among  the  Persians,  had  died  (164  B.C.),  after  a  vain 
Antiochus.  attempt  to  rob  a  rich  temple  in  Elymais,  overcome 
— as  the  writer  of  1  Maccabees  believed  —  by  grief 
for  the  reverses  he  had  suffered  in  Judea.1  On  his 
death-bed,  instead  of  confirming  Lysias  as  guardian  of 
the  young  Antiochus  V  —  a  post  he  already  exercised  — 
he  appointed  one  Philip  to  the  office.  None  the  less 
Lysias  refused  to  submit,  and  proclaiming  his  ward 
king,  ruled  as  regent.2 

Under  these  circumstances  the  aristocratic  party, 
whom  Judas  had  hunted  up  and  down  Judea  and  had 
at  last  shut  up  in  Akra,  found  it  easy  to  interest 
Lysias  in  the  further  designs  of  the  Asmoneans,3  and 
the  regent  at  once  made  preparations  for  a  new  in- 
vasion of  Judea.     Again  he   approached  Jerusalem 
from  the  south.     Beth-zur  was  threatened  and  Judas 
was  forced  to  raise  his  siege  of  Akra  to  march  to  its 
Defeat  of       relief.    He  met  the  Syrians  near  Beth-Zacharias.4   His 
Beth-SZacha-   tro°Ps  fought  desperately,  his  brother  Eleazar  being 
rias.  crushed  to  death  under  the  elephant  he  had  stabbed 

in  hopes  of  dismounting  and  killing  the  young  Anti- 
ochus. But  all  was  to  no  purpose.  The  little  force  of 
the  Jews  was  beaten  back  into  Jerusalem.  Beth-zur 
received  a  Syrian  garrison,  Judas  retreated  to  the 

1  1  Mace.  6 :  1-13  ;  Ant.  xii.  9  : 1.     Polybius  (31  : 11)  says  he 
died  of  insanity  sent  him  by  the  gods  for  his  impiety.     Appian, 
Syriacd,  66,  says  he  died  of  consumption. 

2  1  Mace.  6  : 14-17,  55  ;  Ant.  xii.  9  :  2. 
8  1  Mace.  6  : 18-27  ;  Ant.  xii.  9  :  3. 

*  Beit-Sakariyeh,  eight  miles  north  of  Beit-Sur.  1  Mace. 
6 : 30  sq.  declares  the  Syrian  force  consisted  of  100,000  in- 
fantry, 20,000  horsemen,  and  32  elephants,  but  the  figures  are 
doubtless  exaggerated.  At  the  battle  of  Magnesia,  when  Syria 
was  more  prosperous  and  its  position  far  more  critical,  there 
were  only  80,000  foot  (Livy,  37  :  39).  Similar  doubt  attaches 
to  other  numerical  statements. 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS 


31 


mountains,  and  Jerusalem  itself  was  immediately  be- 
sieged.1 

It  was  the  sabbatical  year,2  and  the  influx  of  refu- 
gees from  Galilee  and  Gilead  had  seriously  diminished 
the  provisions  of  the  city.  The  Syrians  had  siege 
artillery,  while  the  Jews  had  none  except  that  impro- 
vised during  the  siege.  Altogether  it  is  easy  to  see 
that  the  inevitable  outcome  of  the  siege  must  have 
been  the  fall  of  the  city.  But,  as  at  other  times,  such 
a  misfortune  was  providentially  prevented.  Lysias 
heard  that  Philip  was  marching  against  him,  and  see- 
ing that  it  was  impossible  for  the  Jewish  aristocracy 
to  force  the  people  into  Hellenistic  customs,  offered 
religious  liberty  in  return  for  political  submission. 
The  Chasidim  accepted  the  terms,  and  upon  the  sur- 
render of  the  city  the  nation  was  solemnly  given  the 
right  to  live  according  to  its  own  laws.3  The  inquisi- 
tion of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  abolished,  and  that 
for  which  the  Chasidim  and  Mattathias  had  risen  was 
accomplished.4  And  if,  as  Josephus  says,5  Lysias 
killed  the  high  priest  Menelaus,  who  had  held  the 
office  throughout  these  unhappy  years,  the  pious  Jew 
would  have  seen  in  the  act  no  insult  to  Jehovah,  but  a 
new  evidence  of  divine  retribution. 

With  this  charter  of  Lysias  began  a  new  era  in  the 
Maccabean  house.  Hitherto  they  had  stood  for  the 
hopes  of  the  best  and  most  pious  element  of  their 
nation;  now  that  religious  liberty  was  assured,  their 
position  was  anomalous.  Neither  high  priest6  nor  a 

i  1  Mace.  6 :  28-52.  2  1  Mace.  6  :  53,  54. 

8  Judas  was  probably  not  in  the  city  at  the  time,  War,  i.  1:5; 
tut  see  Ant.  xii.  9:6,  7. 

4  1  Mace.  6  :  55-62  ;  Ant.  xii.  9  : 6,  7.  5  Ant.  xii.  9  ;  7. 

6  Judas  may  have  held  some  title  drawn  from  Deut.  20  : 2, 
like  "the  priest  anointed  for  the  war,"  Messiah  Milkhamah, 
but  it  is  not  very  probable. 


Religious 
liberty 
granted  by 
Lysias. 


Consequent 
position  of 
the  Asmo- 


32      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  Chasi- 
dim  desert 
Judas  for 
the  high 
priest  ap- 
pointed by 
Lysias. 


Nicanor 
sent  to  aid 
Alcimus 
preserve 
order. 


representative  of  Syria,  it  seemed  to  many  Jews  as  if 
Judas  should  cease  to  head  a  revolt  and  should  retire 
again  to  the  quiet  of  Modein. 

But  Judas  was  no  Cincinnatus.  A  religious  war 
might  indeed  no  longer  be  possible,  but  political  inde- 
pendence was  something  that  might  still  be  hoped  and 
battled  for.  If  the  earlier  battles  had  been  for  the 
Law,  the  new  should  be  for  fatherland ;  and  so  it  was 
that  he  did  not  disband  his  forces  but  kept  them  un- 
der arms,  becoming  at  once  an  outlaw,  the  head  of 
insurrection  and  the  centre  of  whatever  nationalist 
feeling  the  land  contained.  Immediately  the  Chasi- 
dim  deserted  him.  They  cared  nothing  for  politics, 
and  had  gained  all  they  had  demanded;  and  when, 
after  Philip,  Lysias,  and  little  Antiochus  V  had  each 
been  killed,  Demetrius  I  appointed  the  priest  Alcimus 
as  the  successor  of  the  renegade  Menelaus,  the  Chasi- 
dim  received  him  heartily.  Hellenist  though  he  was,1 
he  was  of  the  seed  of  Aaron  and  would  do  them  no 
harm. 

With  Alcimus  came  the  Syrian  general  Bacchides 
with  a  considerable  force  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
pleting the  reduction  of  the  nation  and  of  killing 
Judas.  He  met  but  little  opposition,  and  after  wan- 
tonly killing  a  few  of  the  Jews,  doubtless  Chasidim, 
who  had  surrendered  to  him,  returned  to  Antioch, 
leaving  Alcimus  as  the  head  of  the  state,  supported  by 
Syrian  troops.2  Between  the  high  priest  and  Judas 
there  immediately  sprang  up  a  civil  war,  in  which 
Judas  was  apparently  the  more  successful.  Alcimus 
called  upon  Demetrius  I  for  aid.  The  king  replied  by 
sending  his  friend  Nicanor  with  a  large  army  against 
Judas.  After  suffering  a  check  at  Capharsalama,  in 
the  vicinity  of  Lydda,3  Nicanor  came  into  Jerusalem. 

i  1  Mace.  7  : 13,  14.  2  Ant.  xii.  10  :  2. 

8  Probably  the  Carvasalim  of  the  eleventh  century. 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS  33 

There  lie  completely  lost  all  the  advantages  won  for 
the  Hellenistic  party  by  Bacchides.     In  utter  disregard 
of  the  needs  of  the  crisis,  he  not  only  attempted  to 
imprison  prominent   members  of  the  Chasidim,1  but 
threatened  to  destroy  the  temple  if  Judas  was  not 
delivered  into  his  hands.     Such  a  threat  turned  the 
Chasidim    back  to  their  old    champion.     Eeligious  The  Chasi- 
liberty  was   in  danger,  and   all   Judea  streamed  to  to^udas*11 
Judas. 

At  the  beginning  of  March  Mcanor  met  Judas  at 
Adasa,  a  town  near  the  Beth-horons.     The  battle  was 
fought  desperately,  but  Judas   won.      Nicanor  was  The  defeat 
killed,  and  before  night  his  head  and  right  hand  were  of  Nlcanor- 
hanging  upon  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem.     The 
day  was  set  apart  as  a  festival  (thirteenth  of  Adar), 
and  as  Nicanor's  Day  was  celebrated  for  centuries. 

Again  Judas  was  supported  by  all  thorough  Jews, 
and  again  he  undertook  to  crush  heathenism  and  build 
up  a  Jewish  state.     But  he  also  sent  an  embassy  to 
Kome,  already  a  power  in  Syrian  politics.2     So  success- 
ful was  he  that  he  not  only  made  an  offensive  and 
defensive  alliance  with  the  republic,  but  induced  Borne  Treaty  with 
to  threaten  Demetrius  I  with  war,  unless  he  immedi-  Rome- 
ately  left  the  Jews  in  peace.3    Unfortunately,  however, 
this  decree  arrived  too  late  to  prevent  the  catastrophe 
which  was  approaching. 

For  the  position  of  Judas  during  those  few  weeks 
in  which  he  was  head  of  the  little  state  was  again  that 
of  a  military  dictator,  unconstitutional,  and  wholly 
dependent  upon  the  success  of  his  troop  of  half-profes- 
sional soldiers.4  High  priest  or  Syrian  governor  he 

1  2  Mace.  14  :  37-46.      2  1  Mace.  8  :  17  sq.      «  1  Mace.  8  :  32. 

*  Josephus  says  (Ant.  xii.  10  : 6  ;  11  : 2)  he  was  high  priest, 
but  this  is  improbable  in  view  of  the  silence  of  1  Maccabees 
and  the  fact  expressly  stated  by  Josephus  himself  (Ant.  xx.  10), 
that  for  seven  years  after  the  death  of  Alcimus,  in  159  B.C.  (1 

D 


34      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Bacchides 

invades 

Judea. 


Again  de- 
serted by 
the  Chasi- 
dim,  Judas 
is  defeated 
and  killed. 


was  not,  for  Alcimus  still  lived,  to  return  with  Bac- 
chides, a  sort  of  legitimist  seeking  the  overthrow  of 
a  miniature  Napoleon.1 

The  new  invasion  was  undertaken  by  Demetrius,  to 
avenge  the  death  of  Nicanor,  before  any  message  could 
arrive  from  Eome.  His  force  consisted  of  twenty 
thousand  infantry  and  two  thousand  cavalry  under 
Bacchides.  Two  months  after  the  death  of  Nicanor 
this  army  had  marched  south,2  and,  about  Passover 
time,  encamped  against  Jerusalem,  from  which  they 
soon  removed  to  Berea3  to  meet  Judas,  who  was  at 
Alasa.4  The  position  of  Judas  as  a  revolutionary  chief, 
no  longer  fighting  for  religion,  but  opposed  to  the  high 
priest,  at  once  grew  weak.  His  embassy  to  Eome, 
prudent  as  it  was,  injured  him.  The  Chasidim,  fear- 
ing foreign  entanglements,  were  again  unwilling  to 
carry  on  the  war,  and  the  battle  was  simply  between 
the  Syrians  and  the  Asmoneans  for  the  control  of 
Judea.  Into  such  a  struggle,  stripped  of  national 
issues,  few  would  follow  Judas,  and  his  army  deserted 
him  until  he  had  at  his  command  only  eight  hundred 
men.  Against  their  advice  he  determined  upon  battle, 
and  charged  the  enemy  with  a  handful  of  his  most 
desperate  followers.  For  a  moment  he  was  successful. 

Mace.  9  : 54),  the  high -priesthood  was  vacant.  The  statement 
of  2  Mace.  13  : 24,  that  Lysias  made  Judas  governor  of  the 
region  south  of  Ptolemais,  is  impossible  on  its  face. 

1  1  Maec.  9  : 1. 

2  Through  Galilee,   according  to  Josephus,  xii.  11  :  1,  but 
through  Gilgal,  possibly  Jiljulieh  near  Jericho,  according  to 
1  Mace.  9:2.     It  is  impossible  to  locate  "  Masaloth  which  is  in 
Arbela"  of  1  Mace.  9:2,  which  Bacchides  destroyed.     Most 
probably  Josephus  is  correct,  and  the  march  was  through  Gali- 
lee.    In  that  case  Arbela  would  be  Irbid,  not  far  from  the  Sea 
of  Galilee. 

8  Possibly  el  Bireh,  nine  miles  north  of  Jerusalem. 

*  Possibly  Khurbet  11  'asti  between  the  two  Beth-horons. 


JUDAS  MACCABEUS 


35 


the 


He  broke  through  and  routed  the  right  wing  of  the 
Syrian  army  under  the  command  of  Bacchides  him- 
self. But  it  was  of  no  avail.  The  Syrian  left  wing 
swung  around  upon  him,  his  troops  were  killed  or 
put  to  flight,  and  Judas  himself  fell. 

After  the  battle  his  two  brothers,  Simon  and  Jona- 
than, were  permitted  to  bury  his  body  at  Modem.1 

The  brief  heroic  age  of  the  Maccabean  struggle  was  Reestablish- 
ended.     The  little  state  passed  again  —  though  with  1?^° 
religious  liberty  assured  —  under  the  high  priest  and  mists." 
the  Syrian  legate,  and  the  party  of  Judas  became  again 
a  band  of  outlaws.     But  Judas  had  not  lived  in  vain. 
The  Jewish  faith  had  been  saved,  and  the  Chasidim 
had  been  taught  their  power.     He  had  founded   a 
family  and  a  following  that  were  to  play  a  large  role 
in  the  next  century  and  more  of  Jewish  history,  and 
he  had  awakened  a  genuinely  Jewish  ambition  and  en- 
thusiasm.    But  perhaps  as  much  as  anything,  he  had 
given  Judaism  a  hero,  in  devotion  and  bravery  fit  to 
be  compared  with  David  himself. 


1  Mace.  9  :  1-22  ;  Ant.  xii.  11  :  1,  2. 


CHAPTER  IV 


Jonathan 
succeeds 
Judas. 


First  ex- 
ploits of 
Jonathan. 


JONATHAN   AND    THE    BEGINNINGS    OF   NATIONALITY 
(161-143  B.C.1) 

THE  death  of  Judas  was  the  signal  for  the  members 
of  the  Hellenistic  party,  whom  his  fierce  administra- 
tion had  forced  into  hiding,  to  "  put  forth  their  heads  " 
and  to  join  exultantly  with  Alciinus  in  searching  out 
the  followers  of  the  dead  leader.  Yet  the  work  of 
Judas  was  not  altogether  lost,  and  in  the  face  of  the 
ruin  that  had  overtaken  them,  his  friends  ventured  to 
call  upon  his  brother  Jonathan,  rightly  surnamed  Ap- 
phus,  "  the  wary,"  to  succeed  to  the  leadership  of  their 
forlorn  hope.2 

The  first  exploits  of  the  new  chief  were  of  no  politi- 
cal significance.  He  was  an  outlaw  at  the  head  of  a 
band  —  or  comitatus  —  of  outlaws.  To  escape  from 
Bacchides,  he  made  his  camp  in  the  stretch  of  desolate 
mountainous  pasturage  of  Tekoah,  between  Bethlehem 
and  the  Dead  Sea.3  As  it  soon  became  evident  that 
they  would  there  be  exposed  to  the  attacks  of  Bacchides, 
Jonathan  sent  his  baggage  in  charge  of  his  brother 
John  across  Jordan,  into  the  land  of  the  Nabateans 

1  General  Eeferences :   Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  1. 1.  234-255  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the 
Jews,  I.  508-520  ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  324-333  ;  Renan, 
History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  viii.  ch.  18. 

2  1  Mace.  9  :  23-31. 

8  Perhaps  Safra  es  Sana.  Conder,  Judas  Maccabceus,  163  ; 
Buhl,  Geographic  des  alien  Palestina,  158  ;  Palestine  Explora- 
tion Fund  Memoirs,  III.  325. 

36 


JONATHAN 


87 


who  had  given  Judas  proof  of  their  friendship.1  But 
the  tribe  of  Jambri,  living  in  Medaba,  attacked  the 
train  and  killed  John.  Thereupon  Jonathan  and 
Simon  crossed  the  Jordan  to  avenge  their  brother. 
They  fell  upon  the  Jambri  as  they  were  celebrating  a 
wedding,  slaughtered  and  plundered  to  their  satisfac- 
tion, and  then  turned  homeward,  only  to  find  them- 
selves hemmed  in  by  the  Syrian  forces,2  between 
the  river  and  its  marshes.  Thereupon  abandoning 
their  camp  and  baggage,  the  entire  troop  swam  the 
Jordan  and  again  found  refuge  in  the  wilderness  of 
Judea. 

Bacchides  followed  up  the  success  by  a  systematic  The  Syrians 
attempt  at  controlling  Judea.    The  towns  commanding  j^^to 
the  ways  leading  to  Jerusalem,  Jericho,  Emmaus,  Beth-  order. 
horon,  Bethel,  together  with  Timnath,  Pharathon,  and 
Tephon,  were  fortified  and  garrisoned,3  while  the  for- 
tifications of  Beth-zur,  Gazara  and  the  citadel  of  Jerusa- 
lem were  strengthened.    The  sons  of  the  leading  men  of 
the  towns  were  sent  to  Jerusalem  to  be  held  as  hostages 
in  the  citadel.     Alcimus,  although  not  a  violent  Hel- 
lenist, in  the  meantime  was  endeavouring  to  obliterate 
the  distinction  between  Jews  and  Gentiles  by  tearing 
down  the  soreg,  or  high  wall,  that  divided  the  court  of 

1  1  Mace.  5  :  25. 

2  It  is  noticeable  here  as  elsewhere  (cf.  6  :  47)  that  the  writer 
of  1  Maccabees  glosses  over  the  defeats  of  his  heroes  so  thor- 
oughly as  to  make  a  circumstantial  account  almost  impossible. 

8  Timnath  was  probably  either  in  southern  Judea,  about  nine 
miles  west  of  Bethlehem,  or  in  Mt.  Ephraim,  where  Joshua  was 
buried  (Buhl,  Geographic,  170)  ;  Pharathon,  in  Samaria,  pos- 
sibly Ferata,  southwest  of  Nablus  ;  Tephon  is  unidentified,  un- 
less it  may  possibly  be  at  Teffah,  three  miles  west  of  Hebron. 
See  Schtirer,  Div.  I.  I.  236  n.  Smith,  Historical  Geography, 
makes  Timnath-Parathon  one  name,  and  locates  it  in  Pir'aton 
in  Wady  Far'ah.  See  also  Eairweather  and  Black  on  First 
Book  of  Maccabees,  in  loc. 


38      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

one  from  the  court  of  the  other  in  the  temple  area l 
—  a  piece  of  profanation  that,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Pious, 
was  punished  by  his  death  in  torments  shortly  after 
the  work  of  destruction  had  begun. 

Under  these  circumstances,  with  the  disappearance 
of  civil  war  and  the  apparent  destruction  of  the 
Asmonean  party,  Bacchides  judged  the  country  to  be 
at  peace  and  returned  to  Syria,  and  in  the  pregnant 
words  of  1  Maccabees,2  "the  land  had  rest  two 
Status  of  years."  In  truth,  the  fortunes  of  the  Asmonean  house 
neans?m  na(l  never  been  at  so  low  an  ebb.  Their  movement 
had  been  repudiated  by  their  old  friends  the  Chasidim, 
now  more  than  ever  seen  to  be  not  a  political  but  an 
ecclesiastical  party,3  the  Hellenistic  party  was  again 
in  control  of  the  state,  the  high-priesthood  was  vacant ; 
the  entire  land  was  covered  by  Syrian  garrisons ;  while 
they  themselves,  after  having  been  decisively  defeated, 
were  reduced  to  a  small  band  hiding  in  the  wilderness. 
Yet  their  fortune  was  suddenly  to  turn.  It  can 
hardly  be  that  the  plans  of  Jonathan  were  those  of  a 
nationalist,  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word,  for  of  a 
nation  in  his  time  there  was  no  thought.  At  the  best 
he  can  have  regarded  his  own  elevation  to  political 
power  as  a  part  of  the  divine  plan  for  his  people.  But 
whatever  his  motive,  his  preparations  were  made  so 
quietly  that  the  Syrian  sympathisers  were  deceived, 
and  thought  that  the  opportunity  had  come  to  seize 
him.  They  thereupon  asked  Demetrius  to  make  the 
attempt.  The  king  again  sent  Bacchides,  who  at  once 
sought  by  fair  means  or  foul  to  get  possession  of 
Jonathan.  Failing  in  this,  he  besieged  Jonathan  and 
Simon  in  their  fortified  town  of  Bethbasi.4  The  siege, 

1  So  1  Mace.  9 :  54  sq.     The  order  of  events  is  clearly  con- 
fused by  Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  10  :  6. 

2  9  :  57.  8  Wellhausen,  Pharisder  und  Sadducaer,  87. 
*  Perhaps  Ain  Hajlah,  just  north  of  the  Dead  Sea. 


JONATHAN 


39 


however,  was  anything  but  successful,  and  Bacchides 
was  persuaded  to  agree  to  a  treaty,  according  to  which 
Jonathan  was  relieved  from  all  further  danger  of  at- 
tack, and  allowed  to  live  in  Michmash  (153  B.C.)  as  a 
sort  of  licensed  freebooter,  free  from  the  fear  of  the 
Syrians.  There,  like  David  at  Hebron,  he  governed 
such  of  the  people  as  he  could,  raided  the  surrounding 
country,  "destroyed  the  ungodly,"  and  by  degrees 
made  himself  the  most  powerful  element  of  the  trou- 
bled little  state.  He  was,  however,  a  revolutionary 
ruler;  for  the  constitutional  authority,  the  Syrian 
Governor,  was  still  in  possession  of  the  citadel  and 
city  of  Jerusalem,  and  as  there  was  no  high  priest  ap- 
pointed after  the  death  of  Alcimus,  it  is  certain  that 
Jonathan  did  not  enjoy  this  honour.  Yet  such  were 
the  political  conditions  of  Judea  at  the  time  of  his 
establishment  at  Michmash,  and  so  troubled  were 
the  affairs  of  Syria,  that  a  shrewd  man  like  Jonathan 
had  little  difficulty  in  manipulating  politics  in  such 
a  way  as  practically  to  free  himself  from  any  real 
control. 

Alexander  Balas,  a  young  man  of  mean  origin, 
was  put  forward  by  Attains,  king  of  Pergamum,  and 
other  enemies  of  Demetrius  I,  as  the  son  and  heir  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  So  strong  was  his  support 
that  the  empire  was  thrown  into  civil  war.  In  this 
war  the  friendship  and  support  of  Jonathan  were  es- 
sential to  each  party,  and  both  Alexander  and  Deme- 
trius began  to  bid  for  his  aid.  Demetrius  promised 
Jonathan  the  right  to  raise  and  maintain  an  army, 
and  the  return  of  all  hostages.  Armed  with  these  new 
powers,  Jonathan  abandoned  his  headquarters  at  Mich- 
mash and  went  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  established 
himself,  rebuilding  the  walls  and  repairing  the  city, 
but  not  driving  out  the  Syrian  garrison  in  the  citadel. 
The  garrisons,  however,  established  by  Bacchides  in 


Jonathan 
becomes  a 
licensed 
outlaw. 


Rise  of  Alex- 
ander Balas. 


Demetrius  I 
gives  Jona- 
than mili- 
tary powers 


40      NEW  TESTAMENT   TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Alexander 
makes  Jona- 
than high 
priest. 


The  temple 
at  Alexan- 
dria. 


the  outlying  towns,  with  the  exception  of  that  in  Beth- 
zur,  all  fled  to  Syria.1 

But  even  greater  changes  were  at  hand.  Hearing 
of  the  offers  of  Demetrius,  Alexander  appointed  Jona- 
than high  priest,  made  him  one  of  his  "friends"  and, 
as  a  token  of  his  new  princely  rank,  sent  him  a  purple 
robe  and  a  golden  crown,2  all  of  which,  with  fine  dis- 
regard of  his  alliance  with  Demetrius,  Jonathan  ac- 
cepted. At  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  153  B.C.,  seven 
years  after  the  death  of  Alcimus,3  Jonathan  officiated 
for  the  first  time  at  the  altar.  Wholly  by  the  will  of 
the  Syrians,  the  outlaw  of  Tekoa,  the  licensed  rebel  of 
Michmash,  had  become  the  legal  head  of  Judea,  and 
the  Maccabean  movement  had  become  identified  with 
Judaism. 

The  importance  of  this  fact  is  great.  Prom  this  time 
Jonathan  and  the  Maccabean  house  could  rely  upon 
the  loyalty  of  the  Chasidim,  for  the  rapidly  develop- 
ing party  of  the  Scribes  could  not  desert  a  warrior 
who  was  the  high  priest.  The  fact  that  he  was  not 
of  the  family  of  Zadok  injured  him,  in  their  eyes,  no 
more  than  it  had  Alcimus.  Like  that  latitu dinar ian, 
"he  was  of  the  family  of  Aaron,  and  could  do  them 
no  harm."  Equally  harmless  was  the  sincere  but 
quixotic  attempt  of  Onias,  the  son  of  the  orthodox 
Onias  III,  to  offset  the  transfer  of  the  sacred  office 
to  Alcimus  by  establishing  (160  B.C.)  himself  as  a  sort 
of  "legitimate"  high  priest  over  a  small  temple  at 
Leontopolis,  near  Hieropolis  in  Egypt.  Thanks  to 
the  favour  of  Ptolemy  Philometor,  the  temple  was  in- 
deed constructed  from  a  ruined  stronghold  or  heathen 
temple,  sacred  vessels  of  unusual  shape  were  installed 
within  it,  the  necessary  funds  were  furnished  from 
the  royal  treasury,  and  Onias  was  established  as  high 


2  Ant.  xiii.  2  :  2. 


8  Ant.  xx.  10. 


JONATHAN  41 

priest  over  Levites  and  priests.1  But  notwithstanding 
it  was  supposed  to  fulfil  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah/  this 
counterfeit  sanctuary  never  attained  any  great  im- 
portance, and  least  of  all  in  the  days  of  Jonathan.3 

Not  to  be  outdone  by  his  rival,  Demetrius  not  only  Promises  ol 
recognised  Jonathan  as  high  priest,  but  promised  the 
most  extravagant  favours  and  privileges  —  the  remis- 
sion of  the  poll  tax,  the  salt  tax,  the  tax  on  grain  and 
fruits,  the  exemption  of  Jerusalem  from  all  taxes,  the 
cession  of  the  citadel,  the  return  of  all  Jewish  captives 
and  slaves,  the  appropriation  of  150,000  drachmas  to 
the  temple.  Whether  or  not  Jonathan  accepted  such 
terms,  which  the  king  if  successful  could  hardly  have 
been  expected  to  fulfil,  is  not  stated  by  our  sources. 
In  the  light  of  Jonathan's  usual  clear  foresight  it  is 
unlikely,  and  when  Demetrius  I  was  finally  defeated 
and  killed  by  Alexander  (150  B.  c.),  it  is  probable  that 
Jonathan's  troops  shared  in  the  victory.4 

1  Ant.  xiii.  3:1-3;  War,  vii.  10  :  2-4.    This  temple  was  not 
closed  by  the  governor  of  Alexandria  until  after  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem. 

2  19  : 18-22. 

3  The  Egyptian  Jews  themselves  made  pilgrimages  to  Jerusa- 
lem.   Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  V.  348,  gives  the 
date  of  the  founding  of  this  temple,  as  150  B.C.,  i.e.  after  the 
appointment  of  Jonathan.     The  date  is  not  easily  fixed  in  any 
case,  for  the  statement  in  War,  vii.  10  :  4,  that  it  was  destroyed 
after  having  stood  343  years,  cannot  refer  to  its  use  by  the  Jews, 
since  that  would  put  Onias  back  a  century  and  more  (270  B.C.) 
too  early.     It  is  probably  an  error  for  243.     Josephus  seems  also 
to  have  confused  Antiochus  V  with  Antiochus  IV.     Probably 
more  correct  inferences  are  to  be  drawn  from  Ant.  xii.  9:7, 
in  which  Onias  is  said  to  have  been  a  child  at  the  death  of 
Onias  III,  and  to  have  fled  to  Egypt  after  the  appointment  of 
Alcimus.     On  this  temple  see,  among  others,  Jost,  GescMchte 
des  Judenthums,  I.  116-120. 

*  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews  (Eng.  trans.),  I.  512,  513,  holds 
that  Demetrius  by  these  offers  ignored  Jonathan,  and  attempted 


42      NEW   TESTAMENT   TIMES   IN  PALESTINE 


Jonathan 
captures 
Joppa. 


Other  vic- 
tories of 
Jonathan. 


When  Balas  in  turn  was  threatened  by  the  son  of 
Demetrius  (Demetrius  II),  Jonathan  seized  the  oppor- 
tunity to  extend  his  territory  to  the  sea.  Accepting  a 
challenge  of  Apollonius,  the  governor  of  Coele-Syria, 
who  had  gone  over  to  Demetrius  II,1  he  marched  from 
Jerusalem  at  the  head  of  ten  thousand  picked  troops 
and  appeared  before  Joppa.  The  Syrian  garrison 
attempted  resistance,  but  the  gates  were  opened  by 
the  citizens,  and  the  city  fell  into  Jonathan's  hands. 
The  Jews  thus  got  possession  of  the  natural  seaport 
of  Jerusalem,  and  despite  its  subsequent  vicissitudes 
Joppa  remained  henceforth  a  Jewish  city  of  the  most 
pronounced  type. 

After  this  success  Jonathan  defeated  Apollonius 
near  Azotus  (Ashdod),  took  the  city  and  burned  it, 
and  then  shut  up  a  great  number  of  fugitives  in  the 
temple  of  Dagon,  and  burned  it  and  them.  Thence 
he  proceeded  to  Askelon,  which  surrendered  with- 
out battle,  and  he  returned  to  Jerusalem  loaded  with 
booty.  In  all  of  these  exploits  the  high  priest  acted 
as  an  officer  of  Alexander,  and  as  a  reward  for  his 
services  was  presented  by  the  pretender  with  a  gold 
buckle  (an  honour  equivalent  to  an  admission  of  semi- 
independent  vassalage),  and  given  Ekron  with  its 
surrounding  country.  When,  subsequently  (147  B.C.), 
Alexander,  defeated  as  much  by  his  own  foolish 
government  as  by  his  enemies,  fled  from  his  king- 
dom only  to  die  by  assassination,  Jonathan  exploited 
the  misfortunes  of  Syria  to  the  utmost.  Demetrius 
II,  who  came  thus  unexpectedly  to  the  throne  (146- 

to  bribe  the  nation  into  disloyalty  to  their  high  priest.  Such 
an  opinion  is  favoured  by  1  Mace.  10 : 22-45,  but  is  expressly 
contradicted  by  Ant.  xiii.  2  : 3. 

1  So  expressly  1  Mace.  10  :  69.  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  4  :  3,  4), 
however,  makes  Apollonius  the  officer  of  Alexander  Balas,  who 
attacked  Jonathan  on  his  own  responsibility. 


JONATHAN 


43 


145  B.C.),  was  in  no  position  to  force  the  Jews  into 
submission,  and  Jonathan  proceeded  to  besiege  the 
citadel  in  Jerusalem.  Whatever  political  ambitions 
on  his  part  such  an  attempt  implies,  it  is  clear  that 
he  was  by  no  means  free  from  the  Syrian  suzerainty, 
for  the  Hellenists  hastened  to  report  the  .  new  up- 
rising to  the  Syrian  court.  The  news  angered  Deme- 
trius, and  he  immediately  started  south,  ordering 
Jonathan  to  raise  the  siege  and  meet  him  at  Ptolemais. 
Instead  of  obeying  the  first  command,  Jonathan  left  Jonathan 
his  forces  still  engaged  in  the  siege,  and,  with  a  com- 
pany  of  priests  and  a  large  supply  of  presents,  went 
to  Demetrius  and  so  won  him  over  that,  instead  of 
being  punished  for  the  acts  with  which  his  enemies 
proceeded  to  charge  him,  he  was  named  one  of  the 
king's  chief  friends,  confirmed  in  the  high-priesthood 
and  in  all  his  other  honours,  offices,  and  possessions, 
including  the  three  Samaritan  toparchies  (Apperima, 
Lydda,  and  Eamat),  and  in  return  for  300  talents 
succeeded  in  getting  all  Jews  freed  from  tribute  — 
in  fact,  gained  nearly  all  the  privileges  promised  him 
by  Demetrius  I.1 

A  short  time  later  circumstances  again  favoured 
Jonathan.  A  revolt  broke  out  in  Antioch,  which 
Demetrius,  thanks  to  ill-advised  economy,  could  not 
put  down.  In  despair  he  called  upon  Jonathan  for  Newoppor- 
aid.  It  was  given  on  the  express  condition  that  the 
Syrian  garrison  should  be  removed  from  the  citadel. 
With  the  aid  of  Jonathan's  troops  Demetrius  suc- 
ceeded in  crushing  the  revolt  of  his  citizens,  but  once 
in  safety,  with  the  usual  treachery  of  his  house,  he 
refused  to  withdraw  the  garrison,  and  even  threatened 
Jonathan  with  war  unless  he  paid  the  tribute  from 
which  he  had  but  just  been  relieved.2  But  the  nation- 

1  Compare  1  Mace.  11  :  30-37  with  10  :  25-45. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  5  :  3. 


44      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Rapid  ad-  alist  movement  was  now  too  strong  both  in  military 
Jonathan  in  resources  and  religious  prestige  for  such  threats  to  do 
power.  more  than  increase  its  strength.  Jonathan  transferred 

his  allegiance  to  the  young  Antiochus  (VI),  whom 
Trypho  had  caused  to  be  crowned,  and  again  had  his 
various  honours  and  privileges  confirmed.  In  addition, 
his  brother  Simon  was  made  military  commander  of 
the  non-Judean  country  from  the  Ladder  of  Tyre  to 
Egypt.  Thus  raised  to  unexpected  military  influence, 
the  two  brothers  immediately  proceeded  to  secure  their 
territories  for  their  new  monarch,  and  incidentally  to 
advance  their  own  political  independence.  They  forced 
Ascalon  and  Gaza  to  swear  allegiance  to  Antiochus  and 
to  give  hostages.  These,  however,  Jonathan  sent  not 
to  Antioch  but  to  Jerusalem — a  fact  that  indicates 
how  independent  he  already  regarded  his  position. 
Shortly  after,  hearing  that  Demetrius  was  moving 
upon  him  through  Galilee,  Jonathan  marched  against 
him,  leaving  Simon  to  complete  the  subjection  of 
Beth-zur.  Near  Hazor l  the  Jews  fell  into  an  ambush 
and  fled  in  panic.  Jonathan,  however,  succeeded  in 
rallying  them  and  completely  defeated  the  enemy.2 
The  only  relics  of  Syrian  power  now  left  in  Judea 
were  the  garrisons  in  the  citadel  of  Jerusalem  and  in 
Gazara, 

As  in  the  case  of  Judas,  the  situation  of  Jonathan, 
at  once  successful  and  critical,  led  to  an  attempt  to 
form  foreign  alliances.  Though  nominally  an  officer 
(ethnarch  of  the  Jews)  under  the  crown,  he  acted  as 
an  independent  ruler.  Numenius  and  Antipater  were 

1  The  location  of  this  city  is  as  yet  uncertain.  It  was  cer- 
tainly in  the  region  of  Lake  Huleh,  but  opinion  is  divided  as  to 
whether  it  is  to  be  identified  with  Tell-el-Euraibeh  or  is  on  the 
north  side  of  Wady  Hendag  near  which  is  a  mountain  and  a 
plain  called  hadire. 

21  Mace.  11:'  67-74. 


New  treaty 
with  Kome. 


JONATHAN  45 

sent  to  Koine  to  renew  the  treaty  made  by  Judas,  and 
what  is  at  first  sight  somewhat  surprising,  they  also 
took  letters  from  "Jonathan  the  high  priest,  and  the 
senate  of  the  nation,  and  the  priests  and  the  rest  of 
the  people"  to  "their  brethren,  the  Spartans/'1  in 
order  to  renew  a  treaty  made  under  Onias  I.2  What 
was  the  result  of  this  embassy  we  cannot  say,  but  at 
all  events  it  did  not  prevent  (144  B.C.)  preparations 
for  another  invasion  of  Palestine  by  Demetrius.  Jon-  Jonathan 
athan  anticipated  the  attack,  marched  to  the  north, 
and  at  Hamath3  so  terrified  the  Syrians  that  they  fled 
without  a  battle.4  He  pursued  them  as  far  as  the 
Eleutherus,5  the  boundary  of  Syria,  and  then  turning 
eastward  plundered  the  Zabadeans  who  lived  on  the 
sides  of  Anti-Lebanon,  and  marched  upon  Damascus, 
which  was  already  at  least  nominally  under  his  con- 
trol as  a  representative  of  Antiochus  VI  and  Trypho.6 
In  the  meantime  Simon  was  conquering  the  cities  of 
the  maritime  plain  and  garrisoning  Joppa.  Returning 
from  the  north,  Jonathan  strengthened  the  fortifica- 
tions of  Jerusalem  and,  with  the  advice  of  the  Ge- 
rousia,7  began  a  wall  that  would  quite  cut  off  the  cita- 

1 1  Mace.  12  : 6,  21.  This  remarkable  claim  of  relationship 
with  the  Spartans  is  made  also  in  2  Mace.  5:9.  It  was  un- 
doubtedly intended  literally.  The  origin  of  such  a  belief  it  is 
impossible  to  discover,  unless  it  lies  in  the  conjecture  of  Ewald 
that  Pelasgian  was  derived  by  the  Jews  from  Peleg,  the  ances- 
tor of  Abraham,  or  in  the  Greek  sagas  as  to  the  descent  of 
the  Spartans  from  the  Phoenicians.  So  Stade,  Geschichte  des 
Volkes  Israel,  II.  373. 

2  1  Mace.  12  : 7,  19  sq.  There  seems  no  good  reason  for 
Wellhausen's  (Geschichte,  220,  n.  4)  rejection  of  this  account 
of  the  embassies. 

8  Hamah. 

*  1  Mace.  12  : 24-30  ;  Josephus,  Ant.  xiii.  6  : 10. 

5  Nahr  el  Kebir.  6  1  Mace.  11  : 62. 

7 1  Mace.  12  : 35.  Ewald,  V.  352,  makes  the  popular  assem- 
bly the  source  of  this  advice  ;  but  1  Mace.  12  : 6  expressly  sepa- 


46      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Ambition  of  del  from  the  surrounding  country.     He  also  fortified 

Jonathan.  ^dida 1  which  controlled  the  road  between  Jerusalem 
and  Joppa.  From  being  a  high  priest  freed  from 
tribute,  the  head  of  a  veteran  army,  the  captain- 
general  of  Syria,  and  the  ethnarch  of  his  people,  it 
was  but  a  short  step  to  becoming  a  high  priest,  the 
head  of  an  independent  people. 

Nor  was  his  purpose  unobserved.  Trypho  was  un- 
willing that  the  Jewish  people  should  thus  become  in- 
dependent, and  at  the  head  of  a  large  force  marched  on 
Jerusalem.2  At  Bethshean3  Jonathan  met  him  at  the 
head  of  the  largest  army  the  state  had  yet  produced. 
Unwilling  to  risk  an  open  battle,  Trypho  used  treach- 
ery. Under  pretence  of  friendship  he  induced  Jona- 

Arrest  of        than  to  go  to  Ptolemais  with  only  a  small  bodyguard. 

Jonathan.  -^Q  sooner  ha(j  Jonathan  entered  the  city  than  the 
gates  were  closed,  his  men  were  slaughtered,  and  he 
was  made  a  prisoner.  Having  thus  his  opponent  in 
his  power,  Trypho  at  once  undertook  to  destroy  the 
Jewish  forces  near  Bethshean,  but  though  without  their 
leader  the  soldiers  prepared  for  battle  and  faced  the 
Syrians  so  resolutely  that  Trypho  fell  back,  probably 
upon  Ptolemais.  The  Jewish  troops  thereupon  re- 
turned to  Judea  unmolested  and  prepared  for  the 
worst  their  heathen  neighbours  could  prepare.  With 
both  of  the  rival  kings  of  Syria  its  enemies,  with  the 
Greek  cities  threatening  war,  with  its  leader  a  captive 
in  the  hands  of  the  Syrians,  the  little  state  saw  little 
in  its  future  but  destruction. 

rates  the  two,  and  the  "elders"  must  have  belonged  to  the 
Gerousia. 

1  El  Haditheh,  about  four  miles  east  of  Ludd,  in  the  edge  of 
the  maritime  plain. 

2  1  Mace.  12  :  39  sq. 
*  Beisan. 


CHAPTER  V 


(143-135  B.C.) 

IN  full  confidence  of  a  speedy  victory  over  a  dis-  Campaign 
couraged  and  disorganised  people,  Trypho  marched  ?njQdea.° 
from  Ptolemais,  carrying  with  him  the  unfortunate 
Jonathan  as  his  prisoner.2  His  route  led  him  south 
through  the  maritime  plain  and  then  east  by  Adida3 
toward  Jerusalem.  But  at  Adida  he  met  Simon,  who 
had  gathered  troops  at  his  own  expense4  and  had  volun- 
tarily assumed  the  leadership  of  Judea.5  Trypho  did 
not  wish  a  battle  here  any  more  than  at  Bethshean. 
To  fall  back  was  dangerous,  since  Simon  had  already 
seized  Joppa.6  Yet  he  forced  Simon  to  give  him 
100  talents  of  silver  together  with  two  of  Jona- 
than's sons,  on  the  promise  that  the  high  priest 
should  be  released  on  these  terms.7  But  after  Simon 
had  performed  his  part  of  the  contract  Trypho  refused 
to  release  Jonathan  and  moved  south  along  the  Sheph- 
elah,  apparently  intending  to  come  upon  Jerusalem 
by  the  way  of  Idumea  and  Hebron.  Simon  moved 
along  the  hills  parallel  to  the  invader,  a  Jewish 
Fabius.  Prevented  by  a  snowstorm  from  forcing 

1  General  References :   Schiirer,    The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  255-271  ;  Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  I. ;  Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  ix. 
ch.  3  ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  333-341. 

2  1  Mace.  13  : 12.  6  1  Mace.  13  : 1-9. 

3  m  Haditheh,  east  of  Lydda.  6  1  Mace.  13  : 10,  11. 
*  1  Mace.  14  :  32.  7  1  Mace.  13  : 13-19. 

47 


48     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

the  southern  approach  to  Jerusalem,  Trypho  marched 
around  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  into  Gilead, 
and  there,  at  an  unidentified  town,  Bascama,  he  killed 
Jonathan  and  went  back  to  Syria.  There  he  caused  the 
boy  king,  Antiochus  VI,  to  be  killed,  and  reigned  in 
name  as  well  as  power.  Some  time  afterward  Simon 
took  the  bones  of  his  brother  to  Modein  and  buried 
them  by  the  side  of  his  father  and  his  brothers-,  erect- 
ing a  large  monument  and  seven  pyramids  in  honour  of 
his  family.1 

The  char-  It  was  to  be  Simon's  good  fortune,  without  performing 

acter  of  great  exploits,  to  break  still  more  the  political  depend- 
ence of  Judea  upon  Syria  and  thus  to  enable  Judaism, 
both  outwardly  and  inwardly,  to  advance  another 
stage  in  its  evolution.  Throughout  the  quarter  of  a 
century  of  struggle  he  had  borne  his  share  of  dangers 
and  anxieties  from  the  time  that  the  dying  Mattathias 
had  bidden  the  four  brothers  listen  to  him  as  their 
counsellor.2  As  it  was,  the  order  of  the  three  men's 
leadership  was  fortunate.  In  the  days  of  Judas  mili- 
tary daring  was  the  one  thing  the  oppressed  nation 
wanted ;  in  Jonathan's  days,  a  mixture  of  military  dar- 
ing with  more  or  less  unscrupulous  diplomacy ;  but  in 
the  days  of  Simon  a  man  was  required  who  should  not 
only  be  ready  to  fight  and  intrigue,  but  should  also  be 
able  to  hold  foreign  politics  in  equilibrium  while  he 
was  reconstructing  the  Jewish  state,  preparing  the 
way  for  political  independence,  and,  what  was  of  es- 
pecial importance,  developing  a  party  upon  whom  his 
house  could  rely  for  support. 

1 1  Mace.  13  : 20-30.  A  restoration  of  this  monument  is  at- 
tempted in  Ferguson,  History  of  Architecture  (3d  ed.),  I.  282. 
It  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  (Onomasticon)  as  still  extant. 

2  1  Mace.  2  : 65.  In  the  distribution  of  descriptive  titles  to 
the  sons,  Simon  is  called  the  Guide  as  Judas  is  called  the  Ham- 
mer (1  Mace.  2:4). 


SIMON  49 

It  was  in  this  latter  particular  that  the  administra-  The  begin- 
tion  of  Simon  was  to  be  of  significance  to  Jewish  his-  pities.* U6 
tory.     Hitherto  the  Jews  had  been  broken  roughly 
into  the  Hellenist,  the  Chasidim,  and  the  Maccabean 
parties.     The  assumption  of  the  high-priesthood  by  the 
Maccabees  had  momentarily  fused  the  two  latter  into 
a  religio-nationalist  party,  which,  thanks  to  its  success 
in  dealing  with  Syria  as  well  as  its  severity  with  all 
Syrian  sympathisers,  had  become  the  dominant  force 
in  the  state. 

But  the  fusion  that  gave  rise  to  this  party  never 
destroyed  the  identity  or  character  of  its  two  con- 
stituents, and  as  the  pressure  of  foreign  danger 
weakened  each  began  to  reassert  itself.  On  the  one 
hand,  there  were  those  who  favoured  a  narrow  religio- 
political  policy,  and  on  the  other  those  who  wished 
to  see  the  Jews  a  nation  among  nations.  The  spirit 
of  the  former  party  was  that  of  Chasidim  and  scrib- 
ism,  and  it  was  to  develop  into  Pharisaism.  The 
spirit  of  the  other  was  the  last  relic  of  sympathy 
with  Hellenistic  culture  and  was  to  mark  the  Saddu- 
cees.  Accurately  speaking,  the  Maccabean  dynasty 
belonged  to  neither  party,  but  used  each  in  turn. 
Judea  was  to  taste  the  bitter  and  sweet  of  national 
politics,  in  which  a  family,  supreme  in  religion  as 
well  as  in  administration,  was  to  carry  through  an 
hereditary  policy  by  the  aid  now  of  one  and  now  of 
the  other  of  two  rivals. 

It  was  no  small  danger  that  confronted  Simon  at  Beginnings 
the  murder  of  Jonathan,  though  by  no  means  so  des-  admi8 
perate  as  that  occasioned  by  the  death  of  Judas.     If,  tion. 
indeed,  his  brother  had  been  killed,  and  if  he  himself 
was   confronted  by   an  arrogant  king  backed  by  a 
powerful  army,  he  was  the  constitutional  head  of  a 
nation,  no  longer  poverty-stricken,  but  possessed  of 
military  resources  and  prestige.     Quite  as  important 


50      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

was  the  struggle  between  Demetrius  and  Trypho,1  which 
enabled  him  to  strengthen  and  provision  his  fortresses 
in  Judea.     At  last  the  excesses  of  Trypho's  soldiers 
led  Simon  to  send  an  embassy  to  Demetrius  II  with 
rich  presents  and  to  propose  an  alliance  against  their 
common  enemy,  as  well  as  an  adjustment  of  the  trib- 
ute.    In  this  he  was   completely  successful.     Deme- 
Practical  in-  trius  granted 2  pardon  for  all  of  the  Jews'  doings,  con- 
grantedTy     nrmed  them  in  their  possession  of  the  strongholds 
Demetrius      they  had  built  (although  no  mention  is  made  of  Joppa 
and  the  other  cities  Jonathan  and  Simon  had  captured), 
and  remitted  all  tributes.     Thus,  to  quote  the  exultant 
words  of  1  Maccabees,  awas  the  yoke  of  the  heathen 
taken  away  from  Israel "  (143-42  B.C.).3 

1  The  chronological  arrangement  at  this  point,  though  con- 
fused, is  not  quite  hopeless.     The  writer  of  Maccabees,  though 
not  clearly  arriving  at  a  chronological  order,  certainly  suggests 
that  the  usurpation  of  Trypho  was  before  the  correspondence 
between  Demetrius  II  and  Simon  (1  Mace.   13:31  sq.)  and 
not  long  after  the  murder  of  Jonathan.     But  according  to  Livy 
(Epit.  52,  55),  Antiochus  was  two  years  old  when  he  came  into 
the  hands  of  Trypho,  and  ten  years  old  at  his  death.    Josephus 
(Ant.  xiii.  7:1),  however,  says  he  reigned  four  years.     Thus, 
as  Antiochus  could  not  have  begun  to  reign  before  146-145  B.C. 
(cf.    1   Mace.    10  :  67   with   11  :  19,   39,   40),   he  could   have 
reigned  more  than  two  years  before  the  death  of  Jonathan,  and 
his  death  must  have  followed  the  latter's  by  at  least  two  years. 
But  since  (1  Mace.  13  : 41)  in  143-142  B.C.  Demetrius  had  entered 
into  the  alliance  against  Trypho  proposed  by  Simon,  it  is  clear 
that  the  death  of  Antiochus  is  anticipated  in  the  account  in 
1  Maccabees,  and  really  occurred  about  the  time  of  that  alliance. 

2  1  Mace.  13  :  36-40. 

3  1  Mace.  13  : 41.     Beginning  with  the  reign  of  Simon,  Jose- 
phus  apparently  lacked    the    account    now    contained   in    1 
Maccabees.     Whether  his  copy  was  imperfect,  or  whether  that 
portion  of  the  book  after  13  : 30  is  an  addition,  is  not  clear. 
This  lack  of  reliable  authorities  is  seen  in  the  brevity  with 
which  he  treats  Simon's  reign.     Possibly  he  was  following  the 
Epitome  of  Livy,  for  his  reference  to  the  cause  of  death  of 
Antiochus  VI  is  not  found  elsewhere  than  in  Epit.  56. 


SIMON 


51 


From  this  time  the  Jews  began  to  reckon  in  their  Evidences 
own  cycle,  the  first  year  of  which  would  thus  corre- 
spond  with  170  of  the  Seleucid.  Documents  and  con- 
tracts were  now  dated  according  to  the  year  of  Simon, 
although  the  Seleucid  cycle  was  used  parallel.1  As  a 
further  proof  of  his  practical  independence  Simon 
now  began  to  issue  coins  bearing  on  one  side  Holy 
Jerusalem,  or  Jerusalem  the  Holy,  and  on  the  other, 
the  word  "shekel"  or  "half  shekel."  Each  bore  the 
year  of  coinage,2  probably  of  the  cycle  of  Jerusalem 
rather  than  of  Simon's  reign.3 

Although  it  is  not  expressly  stated,  it  is  altogether  Victories  of 
probable  that  even  before  this  time  Simon  had  offi-  Simon- 
ciated  as  high  priest/  for  as  such  Demetrius  II 
recognises  him.  But  the  hereditary  right  of  his 
family,  not  yet  recognised,  was  now  to  be  formally 
fixed.  The  influence  of  the  Chasidim  and  scribes  is 
here  very  evident,  as  well  as  the  thoroughly  religious 
character  of  Simon's  administration.  Shortly  after 
the  retreat  of  Trypho  Simon  had  captured  Gazara, 
driven  out  its  heathen  inhabitants,  and  colonised  it 
with  "  men  who  observed  the  Law." 5  Almost  at  the 
same  time  the  Syrian  garrison  in  Jerusalem  had  been 
starved  into  surrender  and  allowed  to  leave  the 

1  For  full  discussion  see  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  257  sq. 

2  Specimens,  both  shekel  and  half  shekel,  have  been  preserved 
for  the  years  1-4,  and  of  the  shekel  for  the  fifth  year.     For  a 
discussion  of  these  coins,  which  some  assign  to  66-70  A.D.  ,  see 
Stade,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  II.  375-378,  and  Madden, 
Coins  of  the  Jews. 

8  For  this  seems  more  probable  from  the  coin  itself,  although 
it  is  not  impossible  that  the  coins,  like  the  documents,  follow 
the  years  of  Simon.  See  1  Mace.  13  : 41,  42  ;  14  :  27.  Simon's 
right  to  coin  money  was  recognised  in  139  by  Antiochus  Side- 
tes.  1  Mace.  15  : 6. 

4  1  Mace.  13  :  36  ;  cf.  13  :  8. 

6  1  Mace.  13  : 43-48. 


52      NEW   TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

The  high-       country.1    Thus,  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  the  be- 
rnafe  h°e°red-  ginning  of  their  struggle  (May,  142  B.C.)  the  people  of 
itary  in          Jerusalem  celebrated  their  deliverance  from  the  hated 
family.8         guard  with  the  same  enthusiasm  as  that  with  which 
their  fathers,  under  Judas,  had  celebrated  the  cleans- 
ing of  the  temple.     The  citadel  was  purified  and  held 
as  a  stronghold,  while  Simon  also  erected  a  palace  for 
himself  on  the  opposite  mount.2    Then  the  Jewish 
people  (September,  141),  —  priests,  people,  princes  of 
the  people,  and  elders  of  the  land,  —  in  gratitude  for 
his  great  services,  chose  Simon  high  priest,  general, 
and  ethnarch,  "forever,  until  there   should  arise   a 
faithful   prophet."3     Except  him  no  priest  was  to 
gather   an   assembly   or    wear   a  badge   of  supreme 
authority,  and  his  word  was  final  as  regarded  the  sanc- 

1  1  Mace.  13  : 49,  50. 

2  1  Mace.  13  :  52  and  14  : 36,  37.    Josephus,  on  the  contrary 
(Ant.  xiii.  6  :  7,  War,  v.  4:1),  states  that  Simon  destroyed  the 
citadel  and  levelled  off  the  top  of  Akra  that  the  temple  might 
not  again  be  endangered  by  a  higher  elevation.     It  is  difficult 
to  decide  as  to  the  probable  truth  ;  but,  on  the  whole,  Josephus 
seems  less  reliable  throughout  the  reign  of  Simon  than  1  Macca- 
bees.   The  uncertainty  affects  our  knowledge  of  the  topography 
of  Jerusalem.     Perhaps  Schiirer  is  right  in  saying  that  the  only 
mistake  of  Josephus  is  in  his  ascribing  the  work  to  Simon. 
For  evidence  of  cutting  away  of  -the  height  about  the  Church 
of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  the  more  probable  site  of  Akra,  see 
Schick,  P.  E.  F.  Quarterly  Statement,  July,  1808.    It  is  not 
without  some  significance  that  the  region  of  the  Church  of  the 
Holy  Sepulchre  is  called  by  the  natives  Khot  el  khankieh,  "  the 
site  of  the  knoll  that  has  been  lowered.'*     See  Bergheim,  The 
City  of  David;  P.  E.  F.  Quarterly  Statement,  1895,  120,  but 
cf.  Quarterly  Statement,  1886,  26.    The  view  of  Graetz,  History 
of  the  Jews  (Eng.  trans.),  I.  544,  that  Simon  demolished  only 
the  upper  stories  of  the  citadel  and  lived  in  the  lower  (Baris), 
is  hardly  to  be  seriously  considered. 

8  1  Mace.  14  : 41-46.  The  authenticity  of  this  decree  as  it 
stands  may  be  questionable  (yet  see  Stade,  II.  382) ,  but  hardly 
the  fact  it  records.  Vss.  29-40  are  a  preamble  to  v.  41. 


SIMON  53 

tuary  and  the  state.     Thus,  by  no  decision  of  a  Syrian  The  consti- 
king,  but  by  the  Jewish  people  itself,  greater  author-  position  of 
ity  than  had  been  the  high  priest's  before  the  days  of  Simon. 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  settled  upon  a  new  family. 
A  military  state  had  become  an  hereditary  theocracy. 
The  chief  of  outlaws  had  become  a  high  priest  for- 
ever after  the  order  of  Melchizedek.1 

Yet  in  one  particular  the  new  dynasty  gives  possible 
evidence  of  the  beginning  of  a  nation.  Simon,  as  his 
coins  show,  was  at  the  head  of  a  city,  but  in  the 
"great  congregation"  that  shared  in  the  establishment 
of  the  new  high-priestly  family  one  can  see  the  uncer- 
tain rise  of  the  people  as  against  the  first  estate  of  the 
priests. 

And  another  important  change  is  to  be  seen.  From 
the  days  of  Joseph,  the  son  of  Tobias,  who  had  been 

1  Holtzmann,  NeutestamentUche  Zeitgeschichte,  66,  thinks 
an  evidence  of  independence  is  found  in  the  strange  word  (1 
Mace.  14  : 27)  ensaramel  (<^<ra/>ajueX),  which  he  regards  as  a 
formal  Hebrew  expression  signifying  ("en  sar'am-'el)  "there 
being  no  officer  over  the  people  of  God."  This  implies  that  tv 
was  originally  a  part  of  the  admittedly  Hebrew  word.  Kautzsch, 
however,  Apokryphen,  in  Zoco,  makes  tv  an  addition  of  a  scribe 
who  thought  the  Hebrew  word  a  name  of  a  place.  Sar  'am  'el 
is  thus  left  as  a  title  of  Simon,  "the  prince  of  people  of  God." 
This  seems,  on  the  whole,  the  most  probable  explanation. 
Schlirer,  Div.  I.  I.  265,  favours  this  conclusion,  but  thinks  tv 
is  the  remains  of  aeyev,  general.  This  view  is  favoured  by 
the  threefold  title  of  Simon,  1  Mace.  13  : 42  ;  14  : 41,  42,  47,  but 
not  by  the  twofold  title  of  1  Mace.  15  : 1,  2.  All  these  explana- 
tions, however,  are  difficult  if  the  reading  of  Sin.,  ^mo-apa^eX, 
be  accepted.  Graetz,  Geschichte,  iii.  447,  makes  the  word  a 
corruption  of  "Israel." 

There  is  here  no  evidence  for  the  conjecture  of  Lucius  (Der 
Essenismus  in  seinem  Verhaltniss  zum  Judenthum}  that  certain 
of  the  Chasidim  from  this  time  abandoned  the  temple  because 
of  the  change  of  dynasty.  The  Essenes  were  not  so  much  hos- 
tile to  the  temple,  to  which  they  sent  offerings  of  incense  (Ant. 
xviii.  1  :  5),  as  to  bloody  sacrifices. 


54     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

a  fiscal  if  not  a  civil  official  in  Judea,  by  the  side  of 
the  high  priest,  there  had  been  in  Jerusalem  some 
special  representative  of  the  Syrian  control,  like  Apol- 
lonius  or  Bacchides.  But  now  this  Syrian  official  dis- 
appeared and  the  civil  authority  was  vested  in  Simon 
as  ethnarch,  just  as  the  military  and  religious  powers 
were  his,  by  virtue  of  his  being  high  priest  and 
military  governor.  With  so  much  power  vested  in  his 
hands,  both  by  the  vote  of  the  people  and  the  act  of 
the  Syrian  king,  Simon  was  but  little  short  of  an  inde- 
pendent ruler. 

General  Yet,  singularly  enough,  we  know  but  little  of  the 

°  of  prosperity  that  followed  the  inauguration  of 


the  new  house,  but  all  information  that  we  can  recover 
evidences  that  prosperity,  in  which  "  the  ancient  men 
sat  in  the  streets,"  "  the  young  men  put  on  glorious  and 
warlike  apparel,"  and  "they  sat  each  man  under  his 
vine  and  his  fig  tree,  and  there  was  none  to  make  them 
afraid."  *  The  most  rigid  Judaism  prospered.  Heathen 
were  exterminated  with  a  relentlessness  worthy  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Sorcerers  were  hanged  in 
companies.2  The  temple  was  filled  with  new  and 
magnificent  utensils,  and  its  service  enriched  with 
new  collections  of  Psalms,3  in  which  the  triumphant 
nationalism  burst  out  in  thanksgiving  to  Jehovah  and 

1  1  Mace.  14  :  4-15.  2  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  69. 

3  Bks.  iv.  v.  (Pss.  90-150)  of  the  Hebrew  Psalter.  Cf.  1  Mace. 
14  :  15  ;  Kautzsch,  Outline  of  the  History  of  the  Old  Testament 
Literature  (Eng.  trans.),  145;  Cheyne,  Origin  and  Eeligious 
Contents  of  the  Psalter,  Lect.  1.  While  Driver,  Introduction  to 
Literature  of  Old  Testament  (6th  ed.),  387-389,  very  properly 
enforces  caution  in  assigning  specific  psalms  to  the  Maccabean 
period,  it  is  not  difficult  to  feel  the  spirit  of  the  age  in  the  psalms 
here  used.  But  it  would  be  rash  to  assign  precise  dates  or  au- 
thors even  in  this  case,  and  it  should  be  observed  that  the  reli- 
gious joy  and  prosperity  of  Simon's  reign  are  sufficiently  attested 
by  1  Maccabees  in  itself. 


SIMON  55 

glorification  of  the  new  dynasty.  And,  if  there  was  no 
prophet  in  the  land,  there  was  yet  the  hope  of  his 
coming,1  and  the  heart  of  the  poet  was  filled  with 
prophetic  visions.  Jehovah  had  sworn,  and  would 
not  repent.  The  new  high  priest  was  to  be  forever 
after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,  and  Jehovah,  at  his 
right  hand,  would  strike  through  kings  in  the  day  of  his 
wrath.  With  the  high  praises  of  God  in  their  mouths, 
and  a  two-edged  sword  in  their  hands,  the  saints  would 
execute  vengeance  upon  the  heathen  and  punishment 
upon  the  nations.2  And,  though  few  details  have  sur- 
vived, it  would  seem  as  if  the  international  policy  of 
Simon,  without  violent  struggles,  was  singularly  suc- 
cessful. Even  before  his  formal  recognition  by  the 
people  as  the  head  of  a  dynasty,  he  had  followed 
the  custom  of  his  brothers  and  sent  again  the  former 
ambassador  of  Jonathan,  Numenius,  to  Borne.  There, 
thanks  partly  to  the  present  of  a  golden  shield  worth 
1000  minas,3  he  obtained  a  renewal  of  the  treaty  Third  treaty 
already  made  with  Judas  and  Jonathan,4  in  which 
Rome  guaranteed  the  rights  of  the  Jews  and  gave 
to  Simon  jurisdiction  over  all  Jews,  both  within  and 
without  Judea.5  The  Senate  also  sent  letters  to  vari- 

1  1  Mace.  14  : 41.    But  this  prophet  is  not  the  Messiah,  though 
possibly  Elijah.     See  Derenbourg,  Bevue  des  Etudes  juives, 
1881,  291. 

2  Pss.  110, 149.     To  this  period  may  also  belong  the  compo- 
sition of  the  older  portions  of  the  Third  Book  of  the  Sibylline 
Oracles. 

8  Perhaps  $17,500.  1  Mace.  14  : 24  makes  it  weigh  a  thou- 
sand minas  (nearly  a  thousand  pounds),  which  is  obviously 
wrong.  Cf.  15  : 18. 

*  The  account  in  1  Mace.  14  : 16-24  makes  the  Eomans  take 
the  initiative  in  this  matter.  But  this  is  certainly  contrary  to 
their  ordinary  custom  (Livy,  xlii.  6  ;  Polybius,  xxiii.  16),  and 
the  account  in  the  text  is  more  probably  in  accord  with  the  facts 
in  the  case. 

5  1  Mace.  15  : 16-21. 


56      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

ous  states  and  cities,  warning  them  not  to  trouble 
Jerusalem.1  The  same  embassy  also  made  a  treaty 
with  Sparta. 

Momentary  Once  only  was  the  peace  of  Simon's  reign  seriously 
°m  endangered.  Almost  at  the  time  Eome  was  thus  be- 
coming the  Jews'  confidante,  if  not  champion,  Deme- 
trius II,  with  whom  Simon  had  maintained  the  best 
possible  understanding,  engaged  in  a  campaign  with 
the  Parthians,  and  was  captured  by  their  king,  Mithri- 
dates  I  (139-138  B.C.).  Trypho  was  accordingly  left 
in  undisputed  possession  of  the  kingdom.  But  only 
for  a  few  days.  Antiochus  (VII)  Sidetes,  the  brother 
of  Demetrius  II,  immediately  began  preparations  for 
seizing  the  throne.  In  need  of  all  possible  help,  he 
wrote  Simon,  promising  him  the  right  to  coin  money, 
freedom  from  tribute,  release  from  all  debts  to  the 
crown,  and  the  confirmation  of  all  other  rights  and 
privileges.  Simon  was  won  over  without  difficulty, 
and  waited  for  the  opportunity  to  furnish  his  new 
master  aid.  The  opportunity  came  when,  after  hav- 
ing defeated  Trypho  in  Upper  Syria,2  Antiochus  be- 
sieged him  in  the  fortress  of  Dora,  on  the  coast. 
Simon  then  sent  Antiochus  a  force  of  two  thousand 
men  and  considerable  treasure  and  arms,  but  success 
had  made  the  king  less  friendly,  and  he  refused  to 
accept  the  aid,  repudiated  all  his  agreements,  and  sent 
one  of  his  friends,  Athenobius,  to  force  Simon  either 
to  surrender  Joppa,  Gazara,  the  citadel  of  Jerusalem, 
and  all  the  conquered  territory  outside  of  Judea, 
or  to  pay  the  enormous  sum  of  1000  talents.3  Simon 
refused  to  surrender  the  cities  or  territory  on  the 

1  Most  authorities  (Schtirer,  Mendelssohn,  Ewald,  Grimm, 
Kitschl,  Mommsen)  identify  the  decree  of  Ant.  xiv.  8  : 5  with 
that  issued  by  the  Senate  at  this  time. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  7  :  2. 

3  A  talent  may  be  estimated  as  worth  approximately  $1200. 


SIMON  57 

ground  that  they  had  all  either  formerly  belonged  to 
his  people  or  had  done  him  much  injury,  but  at  the 
same  time  offered  to  compromise  by  the  payment 
of  100  talents.  Whereupon,  Athenobius,  overcome 
with  the  luxury  of  the  appointments  of  the  high 
priest's  house,  returned  to  Antiochus  in  a  rage.1  The 
king  determined  to  punish  such  independence.  He 
himself  pursued  Trypho  north  through  Ptolemais  and 
Orthosias,  to  Apamsea,  where  he  besieged  and  killed 
him,  but  in  the  meantime  he  sent  his  general,  Kende-  Defeat  of 
baus,  south  against  Simon.  Jamnia  and  the  neighbour-  Kendebaus- 
ing  town  of  Kedron  became  the  centre  of  Syrian  incur- 
sions into  Judea.  John  Hyrcanus,  the  son  of  Simon, 
was  in  charge  of  the  troops  at  Gazara,  and  by  the 
advice  of  Simon  he  and  his  brother  Judas  moved  upon 
the  invaders.  The  extent  to  which  the  military  spirit 
of  the  Asmoneans  had  led  to  a  reorganisation  of  their 
army  is  to  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  now,  for  the  first 
time,  they  employ  a  small  force  of  cavalry.  Jewish 
generalship  and  enthusiasm  carried  the  day,2  and  for 
the  remainder  of  his  reign  Simon  was  not  troubled 
by  foreign  invasion. 

And  yet  Sinron,  like  his  four  brothers,  was  to  die 
by  violence.  A  son-in-law,  Ptolemy,  became  ambi- 
tious to  usurp  Simon's  place  in  the  nation,  and  plotted 
to  kill  him.  His  opportunity  came  when  in  February, 
135  B.C.,  the  high  priest  came  on  a  tour  of  inspection 
to  the  little  fortress  of  Dok,3  which  was  in  charge  of 
Ptolemy.  There,  at  a  banquet,  Simon  and  two  of  his  Murder  of 
sons,  Mattathias  and  Judas,  were  treacherously  killed,  Simon- 
and  his  wife  was  taken  prisoner.  Ptolemy  also  made 
every  effort  to  seize  Hyrcanus,  but  without  success, 
and  this  failure,  notwithstanding  his  loyal  messages 
to  Antiochus  VII,  completely  prevented  his  succeeding 

1  1  Mace.  15  : 25-36.  2  1  Mace.  15  :  38-16  : 10. 

3     i- 


58      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

his  victim.  Hyrcanus  it  was  who  inherited  the  high- 
priesthood,  and  with  it  the  military  and  civil  leader- 
ship of  the  Jews.1 

Summary  of       Thus  a  little  more  than  forty  years  after  the  first 
the  first  gen-  uprising  of  Mattathias,  the  last  and,  unless  we  mis- 

eration  of       take,  the  greatest  of  his  five  sons  was  carried  to  the 
Asmoneans.  '    ,       r;    ,    ,  .         ,„  ,     .,,     ,       .  i  •      n       -i 

tomb  he  had  himself  built,  having  seen  his  family 

maintain  a  successful  revolt  against  a  great  empire, 
his  people  grow  from  the  narrow  limits  of  a  city-state 
into  a  miniature  nation,  the  high-priesthood  together 
with  the  supreme  military  and  civil  power  made  hered- 
itary among  his  own  descendants,  and  Jerusalem  and 
Judea  possessed  of  religious  and  nearly  complete 
political  liberty. 

1 1  Mace.  16  : 11-22. 


CHAPTER  VI 


(135-105  B.C.) 

THE  tragedy  which  brought  John  Hyrcarms 2  to  the 
high-priesthood  was  prolonged  during  the  first  months 
of  his  reign.     For  when  he  attempted  to  besiege  Ptol-  John  fails  to 
emy  in  Dok,  near  Jericho,  he  was  repeatedly  hindered  f^he^s nS 
in  his  attack  by  the  sight  of  his  mother  being  tortured  death, 
on  the  walls  of  the  fortress.     The  siege  dragged  along 
until  a  sabbatical  year,  when  it  was  abandoned,  and 
Ptolemy   escaped   after   having  murdered  his  heroic 
prisoner. 

Other  difficulties  came  upon  the  State.  Antiochus 
VII,  who,  after  the  severe  defeat  administered  by  John 
and  Judas  to  Kendebaus,  had  allowed  the  Jews  to 
remain  in  peace,  now  took  advantage  of  the  death  of 
Simon  and  invaded  Judea  in  the  first  year  of  Hyrca- 
nus.  One  of  the  last  of  strong  Syrian  monarchs,  his 
forces  were  more  than  a  match  for  those  of  the  Jews, 
and  he  soon  shut  John  up  in  Jerusalem  and  besieged 
him  vigorously.  The  city  was  surrounded  with  a  Jerusalem. 

1  General  Eeferences :    Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  272-290 ;  Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  II.  1-34  ;  Kenan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel, 
bk.  ix.  chs.  4-6 ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  342-353. 

2  The  origin  of  the  word  "  Hyrcanus"  is  uncertain.     Proba- 
bly it  is  derived  from  some  ancestor,  since  a  family  of  that  name 
is  found  earlier  in  Jerusalem  (2  Mace.  3:11).    In  this  case  the 
family  had  lived  in  Hyrcania,  whither  a  number  of  Jews'had 
been  carried  by  Artaxerxes  Ochus. 


60     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

trench  and  earthworks,  and  on  its  north  side  were 
erected  a  hundred  towers  three  stories  in  height. 
Then  followed  a  time,  certainly  a  year  in  length,1  in 
which  the  Jews  within  the  walls  were  reduced  to  the 
last  extremities.  The  men  useless  for  war  were  forced 
to  leave  the  city,  but,  since  Antiochus  would  not  re- 
ceive them,  wandered  between  the  lines,  dying  mis- 
erably of  hunger,  until  the  defenders,  at  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles,  readmitted  the  wretched  survivors.  But 
just  as  Antiochus  was  about  to  reduce  the  city,  he 
raised  the  siege  upon  the  conditions  that  the  Jews 
should  deliver  up  their  arms,  pay  tribute  for  Joppa 
and  the  other  cities  which  they  had  gained,  give  hos- 
tages, break  down  the  city  walls,  and  pay  500  talents 
of  silver  (three  hundred  down)  in  lieu  of  admitting  a 
new  Syrian  garrison  into  the  city. 

This  sudden  leniency  on  the  part  of  an  ambitious 
king  who  had  victory  almost  within  his  grasp  was  un- 
Rome  inter-    doubtedly  due  to  some  interference  of  Rome  rather 
feres.  than  to  the  fact  that  he  was  "  religious  to  the  Deity," 

as  Josephus  piously  remarks.2  We  have  thus  a  victory 
of  the  Maccabean  policy  rather  than  of  Maccabean 
arms.  In  fact,  the  brilliant  career  of  Antiochus  demon- 
strated that  the  only  hope  of  the  Jews'  maintaining 
the  position  reached  by  Simon  lay  either  in  disturbed 

1  Schtirer,  Div.  I.  I.  275. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  8 :  2,  3.     According  to  Ant.  xiii.  9 :  2  a  Jewish 
embassy  had  gone  to  Rome  to  recover  Joppa,  Gazara,  and  other 
towns  which  had  been  taken  from  them  by  a  King  Antiochus — . 
clearly  enough  Sidetes.    This  petition  was  not  granted  at  first ; 
but  in  a  singularly  preserved  decree  (Ant.  xiv.  10  : 22),  issued 
in  response  to  an  embassy  of  Hyrcanus,  a  King  Antiochus  is 
ordered  to  give  back  the  cities  he  had  taken  from  the  Jews,  and 
to  withdraw  his  garrison  from  Joppa.     Although  he  is  called 
the  son  of  Antiochus,  Sidetes  must  be  meant.    Apparently, 
therefore,  this  decree  reached  Jerusalem  just  in  time  to  prevent 
its  fall.     For  detailed  discussion  see  Schtirer,  Div.  I.  I.  276  sq. 


JOHN  HYRCANUS  61 

Syrian  politics  or  in  Eoman  interference.  The  little 
state  was  too  weak  to  withstand  by  itself  the  full 
strength  of  Syria.  From  this  time  forward  depend- 
ence upon  Eome  as  an  ally  and  superior  becomes  in- 
creasingly prominent  as  a  feature  in  the  traditional 
policy  of  the  Asmonean  house. 

The  subsequent  relations  of  Hyrcanus  with  Antio-  John 
chus  VII  were  those  of  friendship.  After  having  thus 
accepted  a  vassal's  position  he  supplied  his  suzerain 
with  military  supplies  and  accompanied  him  in  his 
expedition  against  the  Parthians.  On  his  part,  Anti- 
ochus  seems  to  have  been  considerate  of  the  Jews' 
religious  peculiarities,  and  on  this  expedition  against 
the  Parthians  halted  for  a  couple  of  days  that  the 
Jews  need  not  be  forced  to  march  upon  Pentecost  and 
the  Sabbath.1 

But  Hyrcanus  was  freed  from  the  strong  hand  of 
Antiochus  VII  by  the  defeat  and  death  of  that  mon- 
arch among  the  Parthians,  between  whom  and  the 
Komans  Syria  was  so  surely  being  ground  to  powder, 
and  in  Demetrius  II,  who  was  now  reinstated  on  his 
throne  by  his  captors,  Hyrcanus  saw  if  not  a  friend  at 
least  a  satisfactorily  weak  ruler.  The  inefficiency  of 
Syria  was  increased,  also,  by  the  war  between  Deme-  Disorders  in 
trius  II  and  Alexander  Zabinas.  Under  these  favour- 
ing  circumstances  John  took  up  the  development  of 
Judea  at  the  point  where  it  had  been  checked  by  An- 
tiochus VII,  and  throughout  his  long  reign  was  able 
almost  at  will  to  conquer  new  territory.2  Medaba  fell 
after  a  siege  of  six  months,  and  the  fall  of  Samega,  a 
town  probably  near  Lake  Huleh,  with  its  surrounding 
region  followed.  Shechem  (Nablus)  and  its  dependen- 
cies were  reduced,  the  Samaritan  temple  on  Gerizim 
destroyed.  Idumea  was  thoroughly  conquered,  and  its 

1  Ant.  xiii.  8:4.  2  Ant.  xiii.  9  : 1. 


62      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

inhabitants  were  forced  to  submit  to  circumcision  un- 
der penalty  of  expulsion,  and  some  of  them  were  colo- 
nised in  the  three  Samaritan  toparchies  given  Judea 
by  Demetrius  II.1  So  far  from  being  able  to  oppose 
such  conquests,  Demetrius  was  himself  in  desperate 
straits  and  at  last  was  killed  by  Alexander  Zabinas, 
who  was  quite  ready  to  make  any  treaty  Hyrcanus 
might  propose.2  Even  when  after  a  few  years  Alex- 
ander was  defeated  (122-121  B.C.)  and  executed  by  An- 
tiochus  VIII  (Grypos),  Hyrcanus  was  not  disturbed, 
for  the  new  king  was  barely  able  to  maintain  himself 
during  the  first  eight  years  of  his  reign,  and  then  was 
deposed  by  his  half-brother,  Antiochus  Cyzicenus.3 
The  struggle  between  the  two  rivals  lasted  for  years, 
and  throughout  it  all  Hyrcanus  lived  in  peace.  In- 
deed, since  the  death  of  Antiochus  Sidetes,  he  no 
longer  paid  the  Syrians  the  least  regard,  either  as 
their  subject  or  their  friend.4  Thus  secure  because  of 
Syria's  weakness,  he  again  turned  upon  the  ancient 
enemy  of  the  Jews,  "the  foolish  people  who  dwelt  at 
Shechem." 

When  the  Jews  returned  to  Judea  from  Babylon 
they  found  the  land  occupied  by  a  people,  Jewish5  in 
stock,  but  mixed  with  the  older  inhabitants  of  the 
land  and  with  the  colonists  who  had  been  brought 

1  Ant.  xiii.  10  :  2.     From  this  time  the  Idumeans,  at  least  in 
the  third  generation,  were  practically  Jews  ;  cf.  Ant.  xiv.  8:1; 
xv.  7:9;    War,  ii.  3:1;   iv.  4:4.     Yet  even  in  the  time  of 
Herod  some  obloquy  attached  to  them ;  cf.  Ant.  xiv.  15  :  2. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  9  :  3. 

3  Antiochus  Grypos  was   the  son  of  Cleopatra  by  Deme- 
trius II,  and  Antiochus  Cyzicenus  her  son  by  Antiochus  VII, 
the  brother  of  Demetrius  II.     Thus  her  two  sons  were  cousins 
as  well  as  half-brothers.     Cleopatra  had  previously  been  mar- 
ried by  her  father,  Ptolemy  Philometor,  king  of  Egypt,  to  Alex- 
ander Balas,  but  had  deserted  him  for  Demetrius  II. 

4  Ant.  xiii.  10:1.  6  2  Chron.  34  :  9  ;  Jer.  41  :  5. 


JOHN  HYRCANUS  63 

by  the  Assyrians  from  the  Mesopotamia!!  cities,  —  Relations  of 
Cutha,  Ava,  Hamath,  and  Sepharvaim.1  For  awhile  anTjews^ 
the  newcomers  mingled  with  this  mixed  people,  and 
even  the  high  priest  was  not  averse  to  seeing  the 
Jewish  stock  corrupted  by  intermarriage.  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah,  however,  enforced  the  separation  of  the 
"  holy  seed  "  from  the  mixed  race  and  began  the  erec- 
tion of  a  distinctly  Jewish  state.  The  Samaritans, 
who  were  the  most  influential  of  the  old  people,  at 
first  despised  and  then  opposed  the  reform.  But  to 
no  purpose.  The  new  Jerusalem  was  built,  the  new 
citizens  were  separated,  and  the  seeds  of  lasting  en- 
mity were  sown.  Throughout  the  centuries  that  fol- 
lowed each  city  did  its  best  to  injure  the  other.  Each 
alike  honoured  Moses,  but  neither  would  yield  to  the 
religious  supremacy  of  the  other.  If  the  temple  was 
in  Jerusalem,  the  Samaritans  obtained  from  Darius 
ISTothus,  and  again  from  Alexander,  permission  to 
build  another  upon  their  holy  Mount  Gerizim,  over 
which  a  descendant  of  Aaron  presided.  By  170  B.C. 
the  new  temple  had  become  a  serious  rival  to  that  of 
Jerusalem,  and  Jews  and  Samaritans  were  involved 
in  fierce  disputes  concerning  the  relative  importance 
of  their  two  versions  of  the  Law,  and  the  true  place 
of  worship.2  The  very  fact  that  the  Samaritans  were 
sectaries  rather  than  heathen  doubtless  deepened  the 
hatred  between  the  two  people,  and  when  the  Samari- 
tans sided  with  Syria,  war  was  unavoidable. 

Hyrcanus  had  already  destroyed  Shechem  and  the 
temple  upon  Gerizim,  and  now  he  appeared  before  the 
capital  city,  Samaria,  to  punish  it  for  the  recent  in-  The  destruo 
juries  done,  at  the  instigation  of  Syria,  to  Idumeans  Samaria, 
he  had  established  as  colonists  in  the  three  Samaritan 
toparchies.3    Despite  the  aid  of  Antiochus,  the  city  fell 

1  Ant.  x.  9  :  7.  2  Ant.  xiii.  3  :  4. 

»  Ant.  xiii.  10  : 2  ;  cf .  1  Mace.  11  :  34  ;  10  :  30  ;  Ant.  xiii.  4  : 9. 


64      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

after  a  siege  of  a  year,  and  Hyrcanus  rased  it  to  the 
ground,  cut  canals  through  it,  and  made  a  lake  of  its 
site.1 

With  the  fall  of  its  ancient  rival,  Judea  reached  its 
greatest  prosperity.  Like  so  many  other  city-states 
during  the  decay  of  the  Syrian  Empire,  it  had  become 
independent,  and,  thanks  to  its  arms  and  its  alliance 
with  Rome,  was  growing  in  influence.2 

But  the  reign  of  John  Hyrcanus  was  to  do  more  for 
Judaism  than  to  give  it  political  independence.  It 
was  under  him  that  the  two  tendencies  in  the  state 
already  mentioned  first  crystallised  into  parties  with 
distinctive  names,  —  Pharisee  and  Sadducee.3 

The  Pharisees  constituted  the  more  efficient  of  two 
fraternities  that  grew  out  of  the  Chasidim,  the  Essenes 
being  the  second.  Their  chief  inheritance  was  the 
legalism  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  their  central  prin- 
ciple was  the  avoidance  of  impurity  of  all  sorts.  It 
was  this  that  gave  them  their  name — the  Separated.4 

Throughout  the  entire  revival  of  Mosaism  under  the 
Asmoneans,  under  the  impulse  for  purity  there  had 
been  growing  up  by  the  side  of  the  Law  a  rapidly 
increasing  mass  of  unwritten  but  authoritative  com- 
ments and  interpretations,  —  the  "ancestral  tradition" 
of  Paul 5  and  the  Mishna  of  the  rabbis.  Nothing  no- 

1  Ant.  xiii.  10  : 1-3. 

2  Among  the  petty  states  that  achieved  a  short-lived  indepen- 
dence about  this  time  were  Arabia  under  Aretas,  Ascalon,  Gaza, 
Ptolemais,  Tyre,  Philadelphia,  Amathus,  Strato's  Tower  and 
Dora,  Apamaea.     Ant.  xiii.  8 :  1 ;  12  :  2  ;  13  :  3,  5  ;  15  :  3  ;  16  :  5  ; 
xiv.  3:2;  8:1.    Kuhn,  Die  stddtische  und  burgerliche  Verf as- 
sung  des  romischen  Beiches,  II.  161,  162. 

3  Ant.  xiii.  10  :  5,  6. 

4  From  parash.    The  Pharisaic  literature  is  full  of  this  ideal 
of  purity  through  separation.     For  instance,  Enoch   97  :  4  ; 
Psalms  of  the  Pharisees,  17.     The  name  may  have  been  given 
the  Pharisees  by  their  enemies. 

5  Gal.  1  : 14, 


JOHN  HTRCANUS  65 

bier  could  be  asked  than  the  motive  from  which  this 
"oral  law"  sprang,  and  it  was  its  passion  for  right- 
eousness through  obedience  to  the  oral  as  well  as  the 
written  law  and  for  purity  through  separation  from 
everything  defiling  that  made  Pharisaism  the  great 
influence  it  became. 

So  far  as  their  theological  and  philosophical  opin- 
ions are  concerned,  Josephus,  who  was  one  of  their 
number,1  in  his  formal  comparison  of  their  views  with 
those  of  the  Sadducees,2  declares  that  the  Pharisees  The  phil- 
held  to  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  the  resurrec-  ph^riJars 
tion  of  the  body,  at  least  in  the  case  of  the  righteous 
—  a  belief  that  at  times  runs  close  to  some  form  of 
reincarnation  or  migration  of  the  soul,  and  is  charac- 
teristic of  most  later  Jewish  religious  faith.3  He  also 
somewhat  too  sharply  describes  their  position  as  to 
free  will  as  a  mean  between  the  determinism  of  the 
Essenes  and  the  absolute  liberty  of  the  Sadducees.4 
The  Pharisees  he  represents  as  holding  that  fate  co- 
operates with  man  in  every  act,  and  again  states  as 
their  opinion  that  some  things  are  not  dependent  upon 
fate,  but  upon  human  will.5  Of  their  further  belief 
in  angels  and  spirits,6  Josephus  makes  no  mention, 
but  it  is  altogether  in  keeping  with  their  general 
teaching  and  the  spirit  of  later  Jewish  literature  in 
general. 

But   such  matters   are   secondary.     The   indispen-  The  chief 
sable  element  of  Pharisaism  is  its   insistence  upon 
righteousness  through   obedience  to  Jehovah's  law, 
and  upon  the  withdrawal  from  everything  that  might 

1  Life,  2.  2  Ant.  xviii.  1:3;   War,  ii.  8  : 14. 

3  See,  for  instance,  Enoch  46  :  6  ;  Sanhedrin,  10  :  1. 

4  His  comparison  of  the  Pharisees  and  Essenes  with  the  Stoics 
and  Pythagoreans,  respectively  (Life,  2),  is  open  to  serious 
criticism. 

6  Ant.  xiii.  5:9.  6  Acts  23  : 8. 


66      NEW  TESTAMENT   TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Holiness 
through 
separation. 


The  Saddu- 
cees. 


defile.  In  personal  life  it  led  to  isolation  from  the 
common  people,  —  'dm  har'drets,  —  to  repeated  wash- 
ings of  the  hands,  person,  dishes,  and  utensils.  In 
thought  it  led  to  infinite  devotion  to  details  and  pre- 
ternaturally  refined  distinctions  and  warnings.  In 
religion  it  led  to  the  formation  of  a  fraternity,  a 
church  within  a  church,  composed  of  "  Neighbours  " 
who  were  exclusively  scribes,  and  who  were  admitted 
by  the  laying  on  of  hands.  In  politics  it  led  to  a 
determination  to  make  Judea  complete  in  itself  —  an 
isolated  religious  commonwealth,  as  far  as  possible 
removed  from  the  contamination  of  heathen  life.1 
The  Pharisees,  like  the  Chasidim,  at  bottom  a  reli- 
gious sect,  were  forced  by  circumstances  into  political 
struggles.  But  when  once  they  had  become  the  party 
of  the  government  they  looked  with  apprehension 
upon  foreign  alliances,  and  desired  nothing  more  than 
an  insularity  in  which  they  could  train  up  a  true 
Israel  —  their  own  fraternity  (Chaberim,  Neighbours). 
They  were,  in  fact,  by  no  means  a  popular  party. 
At  the  greatest  they  probably  never  numbered  more 
than  six  thousand,2  each  of  whom  had  joined  the  fra- 
ternity in  some  formal  way.  Their  great  political 
influence  was  therefore  due  to  the  regard  in  which 
they  were  held  by  the  people,  both  on  account  of 
their  recognised  religious  superiority  and  knowledge 
of  the  Law  and  also  because  of  their  hostility  to  the 
aristocratic  party  of  the  Sadducees. 

The  Sadducees3  were  not  opposed  by  the  Pharisees 

1  See,  for  instance,  traces  of  this  spirit  in  Ant.  xvi.  2:4;  5:4; 
6  :  8,  and  the  literary  remains  of  the  Pharisees  in  general. 

2  Ant.  xvii.  2  :  4. 

3  The  name  Sadducee  is  probably  derived  from  Zadok,  the 
typical  high  priest.     Some   derive  it  from   Tsaddiqim,   uthe 
righteous  ones."    Edersheim,  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Mes- 
siah, I.  325;  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  etc.,  77-79,  452  sq. 


JOHN  HTRCANUS  67 

because  of  theological  differences,  although  Josephus 
artificially  distinguishes  the  two  parties  on  such 
grounds.1  The  ground  of  opposition  lay  in  the  strug- 
gles between  the  latitudinarian  aristocrats  and  the 
Chasidim.  The  Pharisees  were  by  origin  a  body  of 
religionists  forced  into  politics  ;  the  Sadducees,  a  body 
of  aristocrats  opposed  to  the  oral  law  and  the  later 
developments  of  Judaism.  Indifferent  to  religion  ex- 
cept as  a  profession  open  to  priests,  disbelievers  in 
immortality  of  the  soul,  believers  in  absolute  free  will, 
the  Sadducees  had  been  the  party  of  the  opposition 
while  Judea  had  been  struggling  for  liberty;  but 
now  that  the  Asmoneans  looked  toward  national  life 
on  a  larger  scale,  they  suddenly  found  themselves 
brought  into  new  political  importance. 

From  the  days  of  Mattathias,  the  Asmonean  house  The  Saddu- 
had  been  most   successful   when    supported  by  the  the^rtyo! 
Chasidim  and  their  successors.     Hyrcanus,  no  more  the  govern- 
than  his  father,  desired  to  break  with  so  virile  a  fol- 
lowing and  had  been    himself  counted  a  Pharisee,2 
yet  he  was  forced  to  transfer  his  friendship  to  the 
Sadducees. 

The  occasion  for  such  a  revolution  in  policy  as 
given  by  Josephus 3  contains  too  much  of  the  conven- 
tional legendary  element  to  be  trustworthy,  but  none 
the  less  it  may  represent  some  actual  occurrence. 
He  represents  Hyrcanus  as  complacently  asking  his  The  story  of 
Pharisaic  friends  at  a  banquet  to  point  out  to  him 
the  most  certain  road  to  righteousness.  All  declare 
him  entirely  virtuous  until  the  question  reaches  one 
Eleazar.  This  uncompromising  servant  of  the  Law 
declared  that  if  Hyrcanus  really  would  be  righteous, 
he  must  lay  down  the  high-priesthood  and  content 
himself  with  the  civil  government.  On  being  pressed 

1  War,  ii.  8  : 14  ;  Ant.  xiii.  5:9;  10  : 6  ;  xviii.  1 :  3,  4. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  10 :  5.  8  Ant.  xiii.  10  :  5,  6. 


68      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Reasons  for 
the  change. 


Progress  of 
Judea. 


for  the  reason  for  such  an  opinion,  he  declared  that  it 
was  known  that  the  mother  of  Hyrcanus  had  been  a 
captive  in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  —  the 
implication  being  that  Hyrcanus  was  not  the  legiti- 
mate son  of  Simon.1  Incensed  at  the  insult,  Hyrcanus 
followed  the  advice  of  a  Sadducee  who  wished  to  in- 
volve all  his  opponents  in  disfavour,  and  asked  the 
Pharisees  to  pronounce  judgment  upon  Eleazar.  They 
declared  him  deserving  only  of  stripes  and  imprison- 
ment. Hyrcanus,  under  the  insinuations  of  the  Sad- 
ducee Jonathan,  believed  all  Pharisees  his  enemies, 
and  therefore  broke  with  them. 

While  this  story  may  preserve  for  us  an  evidence  of 
the  Pharisees'  hatred  of  a  warrior  high  priest,  the 
real  reason  for  the  action  of  Hyrcanus  lies  deep  in  the 
inner  life  of  Judaism.  On  the  one  hand  the  Pharisees 
must  have  been  deeply  disappointed  that  what  had 
been  a  holy  war  should  have  produced  no  "  kingdom 
of  the  saints  "  —  some  thoroughly  impossible  theocracy 
administered  by  scribes.  They  must  also  have  op- 
posed the  policy  of  international  treaties,  so  repugnant 
to  their  separatist  spirit.  The  Sadducees,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  in  sympathy  with  a  broad  international 
policy  and  looked  with  favour  upon  a  government  of 
any  high  priest  whatever.  It  was,  therefore,  to  be  ex- 
pected that  they  should  have  been  judged  to  be  more 
serviceable  by  so  thoroughly  statesmanlike  a  man  as 
Hyrcanus.  From  this  time  the  Sadducees  are  the 
party  of  monarchical  nationalism  and  the  Pharisees 
that  of  a  self-centred,  provincial  aristocracy. 

The  break  with  the  "  little  Judea  "  party  was  marked 
by  an  undoing  of  some  of  their  legislation,2  but  even 
more  by  expansion  in  the  life  of  the  state.  Judea  was 
probably  more  prosperous  than  at  any  time  since  the 

1  Lev.  21  : 13,  14 ;  cf.  Josephus,  Ag.  Apion.  I  :  7. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  16  :  2. 


JOHN  HTECANUS  69 

reign  of  Solomon.  It  is  true  that  its  limits  were  sub- 
sequently to  be  enlarged ; l  but  at  no  time  was  it  to  be 
freer  from  internecine  struggles  or  more  truly  inde- 
pendent of  foreign  powers.  Almost  for  the  first  time  Rise  of 
in  its  history,  commerce  began  to  be  of  importance.  sh  com" 
Now  that  Joppa  was  safely  a  Jewish  port,  the  grain, 
oil,  and  salt  of  Judea  were  exchanged  for  the  luxuries 
of  Egypt  and  other  foreign  countries.  Already  the 
wealth  of  the  new  family  was  great,2  while  Rome  was 
everywhere  enforcing  respect  for  the  scattered  subjects 
of  its  confederate  state.3  Constitutionally,  Judea  pro- 
gressed along  the  lines  ordinarily  followed  by  Oriental 
states,  and  had  lost  much  of  even  the  half-aristocratic 
character  which  it  had  possessed  under  Simon.  This 
appears  not  alone  in  the  fact  that,  first  of  all  the  later 
Jewish  rulers,  John  Hyrcanus  employed  mercenaries ; 
the  coins  of  the  period  furnish  some  striking  evidence 
of  this  constitutional  change.  Some  of  these  bear  the 
inscription,4  "  John  the  high  priest  and  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  Jews,"  but  others  are  inscribed,  "  John  the 
high  priest,  head  of  the  congregation  of  the  Jews  "  —  a 
change  full  of  suggestion  as  to  his  position  as  head  incipient 
of  the  Jewish  state.  These  facts,  coupled  with  the 
transference  of  his  sympathies  from  the  Pharisees  to 
the  Sadducees,  argue  strongly  that  as  national  inde- 
pendence had  succeeded  religious  liberty,  a  monarchy 
disguised  as  a  theocracy  was  now  displacing  the  city- 
state.  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  general  tendency 

1  Its  boundaries  cannot  be  accurately  determined,  but  in- 
cluded Idumea,  all  of  the  region  south  of  Scythopolis  from  Jor- 
dan to  the  sea,  except  Ptolemais,  Gaza,  Strato's  Tower,  and 
Dora  (Ant.  xiii.  12  :  2) ,  and  probably  Southern  Galilee. 

2  See,  for  instance,  the  so-called  discovery  by  John  of  the 
3000  talents  in  the  tomb  of  David,  Ant.  xiii.  8  : 4. 

8  Ant.  xiv.  10  : 20-25.     Josephus  has  here  confused  John 
Hyrcanus  with  Hyrcanus  II. 

4  Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  74-81. 


70      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

The  new  that  the  Gerousia  grows  less  prominent.  A  century 
Gerousia.tlie  ^ater  ^  was  st^  ^e  highest  court  in  certain  cases,  and 
the  very  fact  that  John  felt  the  need  of  relying  upon 
something  corresponding  to  a  modern  party,  argues 
that  in  his  day  it  was  possessed  of  some  legislative 
functions  as  well.  Yet  it  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
scanty  records  of  the  time,  and  the  inference  is  una- 
voidable that  the  Gerousia  lost  political  importance  be- 
fore the  rising  monarchy.  It  is,  therefore,  probably  at 
this  time  that  there  began  the  more  academic  era  in 
its  life  which  was  to  reach  such  development  later  in 
the  Sanhedrin.  Judea  had  thus  all  but  become  a  small 
Oriental  monarchy,  none  the  less  absolute  because  its 
ruler  bore  the  name  and  exercised  the  functions  of 
high  priest. 

Along  with  these  constitutional  and  political  changes, 
the  reign  of  John  Hyrcanus  was  marked  by  other  im- 
portant developments  within  the  inner  life  of  Judaism. 
The  Gerousia  attacked  mixed  marriages,  classing 
heathen  women  with  slaves,  and,  in  order  to  fix  more 
firmly  the  religious  significance  of  the  history  in  which 
Develop-  they  had  played  so  large  a  part,  the  rabbis  drew  up  a 
Judaism  calendar  of  feast  days,  commemorating  such  events  as 
the  taking  of  Akra  and  Beth-zur.1  During  this  period 
probably  still  further  steps  were  taken  in  the  comple- 
tion of  the  third  group  of  canonical  books,  the  "  Sacred 
Writings."  2  Already  the  great  rabbis  had  begun  to 
appear  —  the  Zugoth,  or  "  couples," —  and  in  the  time  of 
Hyrcanus  lived  the  second  "  couple,"  Joshua  ben  Pera- 
chia  and  Nitai  of  Arbela,  the  former  of  whom  taught 
"Procure  a  companion  for  study,  and  judge  all  men 

4 

1  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  etc.,  84,  67-69,  72  ;  Ewald,  V.  381. 

2  Ryle,  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  125  sq.  ;  Briggs,  Study 
of  Holy  Scripture,  118-131  ;  Strack  in  Herzog's  Eeal-Encyklo- 
pedie  ;  Wildeboer,  Origin  of  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament, 
136  sq. ;  Sanday,  Inspiration,  101-105,  447. 


JOHN  HYECANUS 


71 


according  to  the  favourable  side/' l  Jews  in  Alex-  Alexan- 
andria,  dazzled  by  the  success  of  the  new  dynasty, 
began  to  hope  for  the  end  of  Syrian  and  Roman  su- 
premacy, and,  in  the  alleged  words  of  the  heathen 
Sibyl,  could  look  forward  to  the  time  when  the  "nation 
of  the  mighty  God  should  once  again  be  strong,  and 
become  to  all  people  the  guide  of  life ; "  and  when  an 
end  should  be  put  to  all  distress,  and  "  from  the  rising 
sun,  God  should  send  a  king  who  should  make  all  the 
earth  to  cease  from  cruel  war,  killing  some  and  mak- 
ing faithful  treaties  with  others."2  Then  would  "he 
who  formerly  gave  the  Law  to  the  pious,  take  the  king- 
dom forever  over  all  men." 

But  this  hope  for  a  triumphant  Israel  was  fiercer  in 
the  breasts  of  the  Pharisees  of  Judea,  to  whom  the 
Asmonean  house  seemed  less  of  God.  If,  according 
to  the  seer  of  Alexandria,  the  nations,  seeing  how 
God  loved  all  men,  were  to  throw  away  their  idols  and 
worship  in  his  temple ;  to  the  mind  of  the  unknown 
Pharisee  who,  in  the  name  of  Enoch,3  burst  out  in  Pharisaic 
apocalyptic  imagery  and  personification  half  inspired,  forebodmg& 
half  grotesque,  the  success  of  the  heathen  kingdoms 
and  the  dominance  of  the  Sadducees,  with  their  "  un- 
righteousness and  sin  and  blasphemy  and  violence," 
their  "apostasy  and  transgression  and  uncleanness," 
were  to  bring  a  merited  punishment  from  the  holy 
Lord,  who  would  execute  vengeance  upon  heathen  and 
apostates  in  an  eternal  judgment.  Woe  was  to  be 
theirs  who  built  houses  with  sin,  who  acquired  gold 
and  silver,  who  set  at  naught  the  words  of  the  right- 
eous, and  transgressed  the  eternal  law.  Even  on  the 
earth  they  were  to  suffer,  and  in  the  world  to  come 
they  would  confront  the  record  of  their  evil  deeds  and 

1  Pirqe  Aboth,  6. 

2  Cf.  Sibylline  Oracles,  iii.  218-248,  652,  930. 
8  Book  of  Enoch,  chs.  91-104. 


72     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

go  down  into  a  hell  of  darkness  and  flame  forever; 
while  the  righteous  should  be  raised,  pure  spirits,  the 
joy  of  angels,  to  shine  as  the  stars  of  heaven. 
TheEssenes.  Still  another  evidence  of  a  rapidly  completing  Juda- 
ism and  of  differentiating  parties  is  to  be  seen  in  one 
of  the  enigmas  of  Jewish  history,  the  esoteric  brother- 
hood of  the  Essenes,  or,  more  properly,  the  Essees. 
Like  the  fraternity  of  the  Pharisees,  it  was  a  descend- 
ant of  the  Chasidim,  whose  very  name,  in  fact,  it  still 
bore.1  Its  genealogical  relations  with  Pharisaism  are 
thus  clear.  Neither  is  the  offshoot  of  the  other,  but 
both  brotherhoods  sprang  from  the  same  anti-Hellen- 
istic Judaism  which  it  had  been  the  mission  of  the 
persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  to  consolidate  and 
energise.  The  continuity  of  Jewish  development  is 
here  unbroken.  However  much  Pharisee  and  Essene 
might  differ  as  regards  important  details,  each  was 
profoundly  devoted  to  the  Thorah,  the  Sabbath,  and  to 
the  maintenance  of  ceremonial  purity.  Each  fraternity, 
however,  had  a  different  future.  The  Pharisees  were 
swept  out  into  politics ;  the  Essenes  were  increasingly 
removing  from  politics  toward  the  loneliness  of  the 
wilderness  and  the  Dead  Sea. 

The  Essene         Just  when  the  passion  for  immaculate  purity  found 

community.    ^  ^^  formally  organised  expression  it  is  impossible 

to  say,  but  by  the  time  of  Hyrcanus,  or  at  least  that  of 

his  son  Aristobulus,2  it  appears  to  have  been  complete. 

Despising  wealth  and  scholastic  virtue,  the   Essene 

1  In  its  Aramaic  form,  Eo-o-cuot  =  Wsaija  =  Chasidim.     So 
Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  370  ;  Wellhausen,  IsraelUische  und 
judische   Geschichte,  260  ;   Schtirer,  Div.  II.  II.  191  n.     It  is 
worth  noticing,  also,  that  Philo  derives  their  name  from  fo-tos, 
"holy."     See  Lucius,  Der  Essenismus  in  seinem  Verhaltniss 
zum  Judenthum,  ch.   4.      For  various  other  derivations,  see 
Lightfoot,  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  347-352. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  11:2;   War,  i.  3  :  5. 


JOHN  HYECANUS  73 

brothers  chose  a  life  of  celibacy  and  communism,  of 
devotion  to  extravagant  laws  of  purity,  agriculture, 
and  meditation.1  Though  by  no  means  shunning 
towns,2  they  kept  themselves  from,  all  contaminating 
influences,  repudiating  animal  sacrifices  and  slavery. 
Many  of  their  monastic  communities  lived  in  soli- 
tudes like  Engedi,  while  others  lived  in  monasteries 
in  the  midst  of  cities,3  where  all  who  wore  the  white 
robe  of  the  fraternity  were  always  welcome. 

Entrance  to  the  order  was  possible  only  after  a  Character  of 
novitiate  of  three  years,  and  this  in  turn  led  to  further 
years  of  instruction  in  the  mysteries  of  the  faith.  So 
far  was  the  principle  of  purity  carried  that  even 
among  the  brothers  themselves  a  higher  grade  was 
defiled  by  contact  with  a  lower.  Industrious,  modest, 
profoundly  moral  and  religious,  living  temperately 
that  they  might  practice  charity,  eating  their  eucha- 
ristic  meals  in  solemnity  and  under  the  eyes  of  one 
whom  they  had  elected  their  priest,  obedient  to  their 
president  and  council,  prophets  revered  by  people  and 
kings  alike,4  working  their  simple  cures  by  magical 

1  See  Lightfoot,  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  82-98,  347-419 ; 
Renan,  bk.  ix.  chs.  6,  7;  Ewald,  V.  370-375;  Graetz,  II.  23- 
31  ;    Derenbourg,  166-175  ;   Schiirer,  Div.  II.   §  30 ;    Stapfer, 
Jesus  Christ  before  his  Ministry,  ch.  7  ;  Friedlander,  Zur  Ent- 
stehungsgeschiclite  des  Christenthums,  98-142,  and  Revue  des 
iZtudes  juives,  187;    Conybeare,  article   "Essenes,"  in  Hast- 
ings's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  and  Philo  on  the  Contemplative 
Life,  278  sq. ;  Herriot,  Philon  le  Juif,  ch.  2  ;  Wellhausen,  7s- 
raelitische  und  judische  Gfeschichte,  258-262 ;  Regeffe,  La  Secte 
des  Esseniens  ;  Thomson,  Books  which  Influenced  our  Lord  and 
His  Apostles,  75-122.    The  chief  sources  are  Josephus,  Ant. 
xiii.  5:9;  10  :  6  ;  xv.  10  :  4,  5  ;  xviii.  1  :  2,  5  ;  War,  ii.  8  :  2-13  ; 
Life,  ch.  2  ;  Philo,  Quod  omnis  probus  liber,  §  12  ;  Pliny,  Natu- 
ral History,  V.  17. 

2  War,  ii.  8  : 4  ;  v.  4  : 2. 

3  So  Schiirer,  Div.  II.  II.  194  n.,  on  the  basis  of  Philo. 

4  War,  ii.  8  : 12  ;  Ant.  xiii.  11:2;  xv.  10  :  5 ;  xvii.  13  :  3. 


74      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Essentially 
Jewish 
origin  of  the 
order. 


Jewish  his- 
tory be- 
comes a 
history  of 
Judaism. 


formulas,  herbs,  and  sacred  stones,  the  Essenes  were 
the  admiration  of  all  classes.  If  it  be  true  that  at  one 
time  their  numbers  nearly  equalled  those  of  the  Phari- 
sees,1 the  fact  shows  again  the  respect  with  which  they 
were  held  by  their  fellow-countrymen  for  their  regard 
for  the  Law  and  the  Sabbath,  as  well  as  the  purity  of 
their  life.  That  they  had  little  influence  upon  national 
life,  that  the  Pharisees  disliked  them,  that  they  ob- 
jected to  bloody  sacrifices,  that  they  were  shut  out 
from  the  courts  of  the  temple,2  does  not  argue  the  for- 
eign origin  sometimes  assigned  them.  Indeed,  although 
they  may  possibly  have  originated  in  Egypt,  and 
although  certain  of  their  rites  suggest  Persian  influ- 
ences, the  Essenes  were  essentially  Jewish.  They 
were,  in  fact,  simply  carrying  to  its  inevitable  conclu- 
sion the  programme  of  the  Chasidim,  and  if  their 
belief  in  angels  and  heavenly  intermediaries,  their 
mysticism  and  esoteric  teachings,  find  expression,  as 
some  believe,  in  apocalyptic  literature  like  Enoch,3  it 
would  be  only  what  would  be  expected. 

Thus,  in  the  days  of  Hyrcanus,  the  history  of  the 
rise  and  fall  of  the  Jewish  state  becomes  clearly  the 
history  of  the  rise  of  the  party  of  the  Thorah  —  of 
the  Essenes  in  their  protest  against  form  and  defile- 
ment, and,  above  all,  of  the  Pharisees  in  their  struggle 
against  Sadduceeism  and  monarchy. 

1  Four  thousand,  Ant.  xviii.  1:5.     It  is  no  longer  held  that 
the  Essenes  were  vegetarians.     One  of  their  societies  actually 
favoured  marriage,  War,  ii.  8  : 13. 

2  To  which,  however,  they  sent  gifts,  Ant.  xviii.  1 :  5. 

8  Thomson,  Books  which  Influenced  our  Lord  and  His  Apos- 
tles, 222  sq.,  but  his  reasons  do  not  seem  very  convincing,  if  we 
except  Enoch,  ch.  108. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE   STRUGGLE    OF    THE    PHARISEES    WITH    THE 
ASMONEANS    AND    SADDUCEES l   (105-69    B.C.) 

JOHN  HYRCANUS,  by  his  will,  made  his  widow  his 
successor  as  the  political  head  of  the  state,  and  ap- 
pointed his  eldest  son,  Aristobulus,  to  the  high-priest-  Aristobulua 
hood.  The  arrangement  was  not  only  novel ;  it  was 
fatal  to  all  parties  concerned.  Aristobulus  was  not 
content  to  share  the  state  with  his  mother,  but  shut 
her  up  in  prison,  where  she  starved  to  death.  With 
her  he  imprisoned  three  of  his  brothers,  thus  in  genu- 
ine Oriental  fashion  removing  all  possible  claimants 
to  the  throne.  Strangely  enough,  however,  probably 
because  of  some  deep  attachment,  he  did  not  include 
in  the  fate  of  his  family  his  brother  Antigonus,  with 
whom  he  had  long  been  associated  in  war,  but  shared 
his  throne  with  him.  This  arrangement  resulted  in 
the  inevitable  conspiracy  and  death  that  attend  divided 
despotisms.  Aristobulus  was  led  to  mistrust  Antigo- 
nus, and  by  a  trick  of  his  queen  and  his  courtiers 
became  the  unwitting  cause  of  his  death.2  He  died 
soon  after  of  a  loathsome  disease  and  remorse,  hav- 
ing reigned  but  one  year. 

The  reign  of  Aristobulus,  however,  though  brief 

1  General  References :  Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  290-312  ;  Ewald,  History  of 
Israel,  V.   385-394;   Graetz,  History  of   the  Jews,  II.  35-56; 
Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  ix,  chs.  11-13. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  11  : 2. 

75 


76     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

(105-104  B.C.),  was  by  no  means  unimportant.  Jose- 
phus *  speaks  of  him  as  a  friend  of  the  Greeks,  although 
at  the  same  time  he  is  ready  to  admit  that  Aristobulus 
served  his  country  by  extending  its  boundaries.  Like 
his  father,  Aristobulus  endeavoured  to  build  his  state 
upon  a  common  religion.  As  Hyrcanus  had  forced  cir- 
cumcision upon  the  Idumeans,  so  Aristobulus  forced  it 
upon  the  Itureans  of  Northern  Galilee,  and  thus  com- 
pleted the  Judaising  of  that  region.2 

But  even  more  important  was  the  constitutional 
step  taken  by  Aristobulus.  Hitherto  the  Asrnonean 
rulers  had  laid  no  claim  to  the  title  or  insignia  of 
royalty,  but  Aristobulus  broke  with  the  precedents  of 
his  house,  and  marked  his  entrance  into  power  by 
assuming  a  diadem  and  doubtless  the  title  of  king.3 
There  is  no  evidence  or,  in  fact,  probability,  that  the 
Gerousia  regained  any  of  its  prestige  during  his  short 
reign.  On  the  contrary,  it  probably  lost  even  more  of 
its  administrative  functions,  and  became  even  more 
judicial  or  theologically  academic.  The  Jewish  theo- 
cratic monarchy,  in  the  third  generation  of  the  new 
high-priestly  dynasty,  crossed  the  threshold  of  an 
absolutism  no  longer  limited  by  tradition  or  inherited 
institutions. 

So  brief  was  the  reign  of  this  first  king  of  the  Jews 

1  Ant.  xiii.  11  : 3. 

2  That  Upper  Galilee  is  meant  by  Iturea  appears  from  the 
facts:  (1)  In  Herod's  time  Iturea  proper  was  largely  Gentile ; 
(2)  Aristobulus  would  hardly  have  conquered  the  slopes  of 
Lebanon  and  have  neglected  Galilee  ;  (3)  in  the  days  of  Alex- 
ander Jannseus  the  Galilean  towns  Asochis  and  Sepphoris  were 
apparently  Jewish,  Ant.  xiii.  12  :  5. 

8  So  on  the  authority  of  Josephus,  Ant.  xiii.  II:  I.  Strabo 
(Geography,  xvi.  2  :40),  however,  makes  Alexander  "the  first 
person  who  exchanged  the  title  of  priest  for  that  of  king."  He 
either  overlooked  the  short  reign  of  Aristobulus,  or  the  latter 
did  not  adopt  the  title. 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES         77 

that  no  time  was  given  for  the  Pharisees  to  organise  Expansion 
any  strong  opposition  against  his  innovation,  but  op-  ander  AleX" 
portunity  enough  was  given  during  the  reign  of  the  Jannseus. 
third  son  of  Hyrcanus,  Alexander  Jonathan,  or,  as  the 
word  is  in  Greek,  Jannseus  (104-78  B.C.).  He,  with 
his  brothers,  had  been  imprisoned  by  Aristobulus,  but 
had  been  released,  married,  and  raised  to  the  throne 
by  his  brother's  widow,  Queen  Salome  or  Alexandra. 
The  high-priesthood  was  his,  also,  by  virtue  of  his 
kingship,  and  his  abuse  of  this  office,  coupled  with 
hatred  of  the  monarchy  and  its  aims,  was  sufficient  to 
arouse  all  Pharisees  to  desperate  opposition.  A  war 
that  had  begun  for  the  preservation  of  the  Jewish 
religion  had  called  to  the  leadership  of  the  state  a 
family  which,  after  accomplishing  religious  liberty, 
had  relegated  the  ancient  Gerousia  together  with  the 
scribes  to  political  insignificance,  and  turned  toward 
international  alliances,  foreign  conquests,  monarchy, 
and  all  but  declared  imperialism.  Three  toparchies 
of  Samaria,  Gazara,  and  Joppa,  as  well  as  other  cities, 
had  been  added  to  Judea  by  Jonathan  and  Simon,  but 
the  ambition  of  the  family  of  Hyrcanus  had  been  far- 
ther reaching.  Medaba  and  Samega,  with  other  cities 
to  the  east  of  Jordan,  Shechem,  Samaria,  Idumea,  Beth- 
shean,  and  Lower  Galilee  had  been  conquered  and  in 
part  made  Jewish  by  the  father,  and  now  with  the  con- 
quest of  Upper  Galilee  by  Aristobulus,  the  ambition  of 
the  Asmonean  house  to  found  a  great  kingdom  was 
brought  into  sharpest  contrast  with  the  Pharisees' 
policy  of  exclusion  and  separation.1 

Alexander  set  about  completing  the  conquests  of  his  Complica- 
father   and  brother  with  all  the  strength  of  a  reck-  syria 
less  nature.     With  the  highlands  on  the  west  of  Jor-  Egypt, 
dan  from  Lebanon  to  the  desert  already  his,  he  turned 

1  See  Wellhausen,  Israelitische  undjudische  Gfeschichte,  227- 
229. 


78     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

upon  the  cities  and  petty  kingdoms  to  the  east  of 
Jordan,  and  upon  the  cities  of  the  coast,  —  Ptolemais, 
Gaza,  Strato's  Tower,  and  Dora.1  While  Antiochus 
Cyzicenus  was  engaged  with  Antiochus  Philometor, 
Alexander  attacked  Ptolemais,2  beat  back  its  army, 
and  besieged  the  city.  He  was  not  able  to  take  it, 
however,  because  of  the  coming  of  Ptolemy  Lathyrus 
from  Cyprus.  Unable  to  cope  with  so  formidable  an 
antagonist,  Alexander  raised  the  siege  and  tried  treach- 
ery. Making  a  treaty  with  Ptolemy,  he  also  summoned 
Cleopatra,  the  mother  of  Ptolemy,  who  had  but  recently 
driven  her  son  out  from  Egypt.  Ptolemy  learned  of 
his  ally's  unfaithfulness,  and  immediately  marched 
with  most  of  his  force  to  conquer  Judea.3  He  cap- 
tured and  sacked  Asochis4  in  Galilee  on  a  Sabbath, 
attacked  Sepphoris  unsuccessfully,  and  then  advanced 
against  Alexander.  The  battle  was  fought  at  Aso- 
phon,  an  unidentified  spot  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Jordan  valley,  and,  thanks  to  Alexander's  lack  of 
generalship,  the  tactics  of  Ptolemy's  general,  Philo- 
stephanus,  and  the  discipline  of  his  mercenaries,  re- 
Defeat  of  suited  in  a  complete  defeat  for  the  Jews.5  Thereupon 
Alexander,  ptolemy  took  Ptolemais,  which,  like  Alexander,  had 
proved  untrue  to  him,  and  ravaged  Judea;  according  to 
Josephus,  boiling  and  eating  women  and  children.6  In 
the  meantime  Cleopatra  had  come  up  from  Egypt  in 
pursuit  of  her  son,  and  proceeded  to  besiege  Ptolemais. 
Ptolemy,  seizing  this  opportunity,  invaded  Egypt,  but 
only  to  be  defeated.  Thus,  by  a  strange  turn  of  for- 
tune Judea  was  again  about  to  be  subject  to  Egypt. 
In  fact,  nothing  prevented  such  a  misfortune  except 
the  advice  of  Ananias,  one  of  Cleopatra's  generals, 

1  Ant.  xiii.  12  :  2.  2  Akka.  3  Ant.  xiii.  12  : 2-4. 

4  Probably  Eefr  Menda,  or  Bedawije,  both  near  the  plain  of 
Buttauf ;  Buhl,  Geographic,  108. 

5  Ant.  xiii.  12  :  5.  6  Ant.  xiii.  12  :  6. 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES        79 

himself  a  Jew,  who  foretold  a  revolt  of  the  Egyptian 
Jews  if  such  a  step  were  taken.  Cleopatra,  therefore, 
renewed  her  treaty  with  Alexander,  and  returned  to 
Egypt.1 

Alexander  was  thus  left  once  more  free  to  pursue  His  new 
his  policy  of  expansion.  He  took  Gadara2  after  a  con<luests' 
siege  of  ten  months,  and  Amathus,3  but  having  lost  his 
baggage  and  a  large  number  of  his  men  in  a  sudden 
attack  by  Zeno,  the  local  sovereign,  he  crossed  again 
to  the  coast.  There  he  captured  and  sacked  Eaphia4 
and  Anthedon.5  Gaza  was  betrayed  into  his  hands 
after  a  year's  siege,  and  was  plundered  and  burned, 
its  Council  of  Five  Hundred  perishing  in  the  burning 
temple  of  Apollo  (96  B.C.).6  He  then  made  a  fresh 
attack  upon  the  region  east  of  Jordan,  and  succeeded 
in  overcoming  the  cities  and  tribes  in  Moab  and 
Gilead.  Amathus,  which  had  revolted,  he  again  took 
and  utterly  destroyed.  The  campaign  ended  in  mis- 
fortune, however,  as  the  Arabian  Obedas,  whose  king- 
dom, or,  at  least,  suzerainty,  embraced  much  of  the 
region  between  Petra  and  Hermon,  drew  the  Jews 
into  a  narrow  ravine  near  Gadara,  and  then  drove 
troops  of  camels  down  upon  them,  completely  destroy- 
ing the  army.  Barely  escaping  with  his  life,  Alex- 
ander fled  to  Jerusalem,  only  to  find  his  people  in  open 
rebellion. 

The   explanation  of  this  first  revolt  against  the  Revolt  of 
Maccabean  house  is  not  difiicult  to  discover.     Alex-  thejews- 
ander  had  already  drawn  down  upon  himself  the  hatred 
of  the  Pharisees  and  their  sympathisers  by  his  disregard 
of  his  priestly  office.     On  one  occasion,  as  he  had  been 
officiating  at  the  altar  during  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 

1  Ant.  xiii.  13  :  1,  2.  2  Urn  Keis. 

8  Tell  'Amate,  north  of  the  Jabbok.  So  Buhl,  Geographic, 
259  ;  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  298. 

4  Tell  Rifah.  5  Teda.  6  Ant.  xiii.  13 :  3. 


80     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

the  crowds  of  worshippers  had  pelted  him  with  cit- 
rons they  had  brought  to  the  temple,1  shouting  insults 
to  his  mother.  As  a  punishment,  he  had  sent  his 
mercenaries  against  the  crowd,  and  six  thousand  of 
the  Jews  had  been  killed.2  Thereafter,  Alexander  had 
officiated  behind  a  wooden  fence  he  had  built  within 
the  Court  of  the  Priests. 

Such  a  punishment  of  orthodox  Jews,  the  first  on 
the  part  of  any  Asmonean,  was,  in  itself,  enough  to 
excite  the  stricter  classes,  who  had  already  been  em- 
bittered by  the  reorganisation  of  the  Gerousia,  which, 
since  the  last  years  of  Hyrcanus,  had  been  com- 
posed wholly  of  Sadducees,  unless  we  make  an  excep- 
tion of  the  redoubtable  Simon  ben  Shetach,  brother  of 
the  queen.3  But  more  potent  than  all  must  have  been 
the  deep-seated  opposition  of  the  Pharisees  to  the  undis- 
guised usurpations  of  the  high  priest.4  The  scanda- 
lous stories  told  of  him  by  Josephus  must  be  in  some 
degree  charged  to  the  historian's  bias,  but  the  hatred 
of  the  Pharisees  was  intense,  and  when,  after  eight 
years  of  endurance,  it  once  seemed  possible  to  crush 
the  fugitive  king  and  restore  the  old  constitution,  they 
and  their  followers  rose  as  a  man. 

For  six  years  the  religious  and  civil  war  raged,  and 
fifty  thousand  Jews  are  said  to  have  fallen.5  Then, 
with  one  of  the  untactful  attempts  at  compromise 

1  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  98,  99,  and  Graetz,  II.  45,  find  this 
episode  related  in  Sukka,  48  &,  where  a  Sadducee  is  said  to 
have  been  pelted  with  citrons  because  he  poured  the  libation 
upon  the  earth  rather  than  upon  the  altar. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  13  :  5. 

3  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  96-98. 

*  The  coins  of  Alexander  are  sometimes  inscribed  "High 
Priest  and  Congregation  of  the  Jews,"  and  sometimes  with  his 
name  in  Greek  and  Hebrew  as  king,  Madden,  Coins  of  the 
Jews,  83-90. 

5  Ant.  xiii.  13  :  5. 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES       81 


which  are  to  be  seen  throughout  his  life,  even  in  the 
midst  of  Pharisaic  libels,  Alexander  attempted  to  treat 
with  his  subjects.  But  their  only  condition  of  submis- 
sion was  that  he  should  kill  himself,  and  in  a  rage 
of  hate  they  turned  for  aid  to  the  Syrian  king,  Deme-  The  Phari- 
trius  Eucserus.  Such  a  course  was  desperate  but  mon^d1" 
characteristic  of  the  Pharisees,  who  now,  as  later,  from  Syria, 
preferred  a  foreign  ruler  and  a  Gerousia  which  they 
might  control,  to  independence  and  an  irresponsible 
monarch.1  Demetrius  came  to  the  aid  of  the  rebels 
with  a  large  army,  in  which  were  many  Jews.  Alex- 
ander, also  with  an  army  of  mercenaries  and  Jews, 
met  him  near  Shechem.  For  a  while  each  army  en- 
deavoured to  cause  the  defection  of  their  kinsmen 
from  the  ranks  of  the  other,  but  to  no  purpose,  and 
a  battle  was  finally  fought  in  which  Alexander  was 
utterly  and  hopelessly  beaten.2  Judea  was  again  at 
the  mercy  of  the  Syrians,  while  the  Arabians  were 
kept  from  invasion  only  by  Alexander's  ceding  them 
his  conquests  in  Moab  and  Gilead.3 

But  the  very  misfortune  of  Alexander  was  to  prove  Triumph  of 
his  salvation.  Six  thousand  of  the  Jews  who  had  Alexander- 
fought  under  Demetrius,  seeing  the  dangers  to  which 
their  land  had  been  exposed  by  their  victory,  suddenly 
deserted  Demetrius  and  joined  themselves  to  their 
wretched  king.  Immediately  the  entire  scene  changed. 
Demetrius  retired.  Alexander,  with  his  new  army, 
repeatedly  defeated  the  rebels,  and  at  last  shut  up 
their  leaders  in  the  unidentified  town  of  Bethome."4 
The  city  fell  into  his  hands,  and  he  crucified  eight 
hundred  of  his  prisoners  at  Jerusalem,  after  having 
had  their  wives  and  children  massacred  before  their 
eyes. 

With  this  fearful  vengeance  the  civil  war  came  to 


1  See  Ant.  xvii.  11  :  2. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  14 : 1. 

G 


8  Ant.  xiii.  14  :  2. 

*  Bemeselis  in  War,  i.  4  : 6. 


82      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

an  end.  Eight  thousand  of  the  rebels  fled  from  the 
land,  and  for  the  rest  of  his  reign  Alexander  —  known 
now  as  the  Thracian1  —  kept  the  peace  from  his 
castles  of  Alexandrium  and  Machaerus  with  equal 
severity  and  success. 

His  new  Freed  from  the  opposition  of  the  Pharisees,  Alexan- 

conquests.  ^er  cou^  again  take  up  the  extension  of  his  kingdom. 
For  a  moment,  it  is  true,  it  seemed  possible  that  the 
dying  Syrian  Empire  might  be  revitalised  by  the  ener- 
getic Antiochus  Dionysius,  who  would  not  be  kept 
back  by  Alexander's  ditch  and  wooden  wall  across  the 
plain  from  Antipatris ; 2  but  Antiochus  was  defeated 
and  killed  by  Aretas,  king  of  Arabia,  who  then  came 
into  possession  of  Ccele-Syria  and  Damascus.  Again 
the  fortunes  of  Alexander  looked  dark,  for  Aretas 
defeated  him  at  Adida.3  But  the  two  kings  arranged 
some  sort  of  conditions  of  peace,  and  Alexander  was 
again  unhampered  for  foreign  war.  In  this  he  was 
brilliantly  successful.  Within  three  years  Dium, 
Essa,  with  the  treasures  of  Alexander's  old  enemy 
Zeno,  Gaulana,4  and  Gamala,  cities  on  the  east  of 
Jordan,  together  with  Seleucia  near  Lake  Huleh,  fell 
into  his  hands,  and  doubtless,  in  accordance  with  his 
general  relentless  policy,  were  forced  to  conform  to  Jew- 
ish practices.  He  returned  to  Jerusalem,  where  he 
was  received  with  great  rejoicings.  And  with  reason, 
for  at  last  the  ambition  of  his  house  and  the  pride  of 
the  un-Pharisaic  portion  of  his  people  were  in  some 
way  satisfied.  Thanks  to  the  indomitable  warrior,  care- 
Greatness  of  less  as  high  priest  though  he  may  have  been,  the  boun- 
Judea.  daries  of  Judea  were  now  approximately  those  of  the 

best  days  of  David.     From  the  desert  to  the  sea,  and 

1  Ant.  xiii.  14  :  2  ;   War,  i.  4  :  5,  6. 

2  Probably  Kul  'at  Ras  el-Ain,  P.  E.  F.  Memoirs,  II.  258- 
262  ;  Buhl,  Geographie,  198,  199. 

8  Haditheh,  near  Lydda.  *  Saliem  el-Jaulan  ? 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES         83 

from  Lebanon  to  the  Eiver  of  Egypt,  there  were  but 
few  cities  which  had  not  accepted  Jewish  sovereignty 
and  Jewish  rites,  or,  like  Pella,  been  laid  in  ruins 
because  of  their  refusal  to  yield  such  obedience.  Even 
Damascus  seems  to  have  been  a  subject,  or  at  least 
under  the  protection  of  Alexander.1  Ascalon  on  the 
plain,  Eagaba2  and  Philadelphia,  on  the  east  of  Jor- 
dan, alone  maintained  their  independence,  and  Eagaba 
fell  just  as  Alexander  died.3 

Yet  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  think  of  the  new  king-  Lack  of 
dom  as  unified.  Despite  the  strenuous  efforts  of  the 
king,  it  is  clear  that  the  land  remained  broken  up  into 
little  regions  centring  about  cities,  and  also  that  the 
heathen  were  still  in  the  land.  These  subject  cities 
it  was,  undoubtedly,  that  paid  the  taxes  which  sup- 
ported the  Jewish  state,4  but  they  were  also  liable  at 
any  time  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  some  princeling, 
like  Zeno,  and  then  throw  off  the  Jewish  yoke,  per- 
haps, indeed,  to  rise  into  actual  rivalry  with  Judea. 
In  fact,  they  never  were  thoroughly  assimilated,  and 
remained  to  the  end  centres  of  deepening  anti- 
Semitism  in  the  midst  of  the  Jewish  territory. 

After  a  reign  of  twenty-seven  years  Alexander  died,  Death  of 
worn  out  by  hardship  and  dissipation.     But  he  died   Alexander- 
as  he  had  lived,  a  warrior.    Through  these  years  of  fail- 
ing health  he  carried  on  his  wars,  and  at  last  was  over- 
come by  death  at  the  siege  of  Eagaba,  though  telling 
his  wife  to  conceal  the  fact  until  the  city  had  fallen. 

Alexander's  death  was  to  work  important  changes  in  Results  of 
Judea.     He  had  never  been  a  friend  of  the  Greeks,  hls  reisn- 
and  his  very  wars  had  been  in  part  for  religion.     His 
struggle  with  the  Pharisees  had  grown  from  political, 
rather  than  religious  causes,  and  it  is  not  improbable 

1  Ant.  xiii.  16  :  3  ;   War,  i.  5 :  3. 

2  Its  site  is  unidentified.  3  Ant.  xiii.  15  : 3,  4. 

4  Wellhausen,  Israelitische  und  judische  Geschichte,  233. 


84     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


First 
Maccabees. 


Growth  of 
Pharisaism 
seen  in  2 
Maccabees. 


that  his  last  years  had  been  marked  by  something  like 
attempts  at  reconciliation.1  At  all  events,  when  he 
found  death  upon  him,  he  advised  Alexandra,  who  was 
to  succeed  him,  to  depend  upon  the  Pharisees  once 
more.2  That  he  was  not  altogether  abandoned  by  the 
party  of  the  Law  appears  in  almost  the  only  literary  sur- 
vival of  Sadduceeism,  the  book  of  1  Maccabees  —  the 
work  of  some  sincere  but  unknown  friend  of  the  As- 
monean  family.3  Pull  of  devotion  to  the  Law  and  of 
hatred  of  the  Hellenising  priests  and  people  of  the  early 
days,  the  book  breathes  the  spirit  of  un-Pharisaic  Juda- 
ism. Silent  as  to  the  oral  law,  and  deeply  religious 
though  it  is,  it 4  never  mentions  the  name  of  God.  It 
is  something  more  than  the  work  of  a  pamphleteer,  and 
in  its  simple,  direct  style  it  tells  how  the  deliverance 
from  Syria  resulted,  not  from  the  miraculous  interpo- 
sition of  Jehovah  or  the  patriotism  of  the  Jews  as  a 
people,  but  from  the  work  of  the  Maccabees,  by  whose 
hand  alone  was  deliverance  given  unto  Israel.6 

But  it  was  Pharisaism  that  most  found  expression 
during  Alexander's  reign.  Without  venturing  upon 
unqualified  statements,  it  may  have  been  at  this  time 

1  Cf.  Ant.  xiii.  16 : 17  which,  if  it  has  any  historical  value, 
implies  something  of  the  sort  rather  than  a  sudden  conversion. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  15  :  5. 

3  The  date  of  the  book  in  its  present  shape  must  be  later  than 
John  Hyrcanus  (16  : 23,  24),  but  before  the  Koman  conquest. 
See  Fairweather  and  Black,  43  ;  Schiirer,  Div.  II.  III.  8 ;  Streane, 
Age  of  the  Maccabees,  144-152 ;    Kautzsch,  Apokryphen  und 
Pseudepigraphen,  24  sq.,  and  the  Introductions  of  Bissell  and 
Wace.    It  originally  was  written  in  Hebrew  or  Aramaic,  and 
existed  in  this  form  as  late  as  the  time  of  Origen.    Eusebius, 
Hist.  Eccl.  vi.  25  : 2.     The  fact  that  the  section  13  :  31-16  :  24 
was  not  used  by  Josephus  lends  some  strength  to  the  view  that 
it  is  of  later  origin  than  the  rest  of  the  book. 

4  For  instance,  3  : 18. 

5  5  : 62  ;  13  : 2-6  ;  14  : 26.    See  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche 
Zeitgeschichte,  11. 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES         85 

that  another  unknown  writer  epitomised  snch  portions 
of  an  historical  work  of  Jason  of  Gyrene  as  told  of  the 
early  days  of  the  Maccabean  house,  entitling  it  the 
second  book  of  Maccabees.1  In  many  particulars  it  re- 
tells more  elaborately  the  story  of  1  Maccabees,2  but  its 
divergences  are  sufficient  to  prove  its  independence 
of  that  work.  It  is,  in  fact,  a  Pharisaic  reply  to  1 
Maccabees,3  avowedly  written  to  show  "  the  manifes- 
tation made  from  heaven  in  behalf  of  those  who  were 
zealous  to  believe  manfully  in  defence  of  Judaism."  4 
So  full  is  it  of  legendary  material  introduced  with  this 
motive,  that  its  chief  value  (outside  its  account  of  cer- 
tain of  the  doings  of  Antiochus  IV)  lies  in  its  expres- 
sion of  the  interpretation  put  by  the  Pharisees  upon 
history.5 

A  much  more  important  element  of  the  Pharisaic  Book  of 
spirit  is  seen  in  those  portions  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  j^i         ' 
which  may  be  with  safety  referred  to  the  reign  of 
Alexander.6    The  oppressions  of  Alexander  called  for 
vengeance  from  heaven,  and  for  the  establishment  of 

1  Cf .  2  Mace.  2  : 26,  28  with  2  :  23. 

2  Cf.,  for  instance,  1  Mace.  3-7  with  2  Mace.  8-15. 

3  Cf .  2  Mace.  14 :  6  with  1  Mace.  7  :  12.      So  Wellhausen, 
Pharisder  und  Sadducaer,  82  ;  Kautzsch,  Apok.  und  Pseud.  84. 

4  2  Mace.  2  :  21.     See  also  3  :  24-29,  33,  34  ;  5  :  2,  3  ;  10  :  29, 
30 ;  11  :  6-11 ;  12  :  22,  etc. 

6  There  is  no  certainty  in  this  dating  of  the  book.  It  is  gen- 
erally believed  that  Jason  of  Cyrene  wrote  before  150  B.C.,  but 
the  date  of  the  Epitome  is  fixed  largely  by  the  preferences  of 
different  writers.  Kautzsch,  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament, 
204,  puts  it  into  the  first  Christian  century,  but  it  certainly  is 
older  than  Philo,  who  seems  to  have  used  the  book  in  his  work 
(Quod  omnis  probus  liber,  §  13),  though  possibly  he  knew  the 
original  work  of  Jason.  So  Schtirer,  Div.  II.  III.  213. 

6  Charles,  Book  of  Enoch,  chs.  37-71.  Schiirer  (3ded.),  III. 
190-208,  while  holding  the  sections  to  be  pre-Christian,  favours 
the  time  of  Herod  I ;  but  the  utter  silence  as  to  the  Komans 
makes  so  late  a  date  unlikely. 


86      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  Mes- 
sianic hope. 


Alexandra 
the  Queen. 


the  Messianic  kingdom.  This  latter  hope  was,  it  is 
true,  nothing  new.  It  is  hard  to  find  a  period  in  the 
history  of  the  Jews  when  the  more  trustful  hearts  had 
not  been  sustained  by  hope  of  the  coming  of  some 
specially  empowered  person  who  should  cause  right- 
eousness and  justice  to  go  hand  in  hand  with  Jewish 
victories.  But  now  the  misery  of  those  who  made 
God's  law  their  especial  delight  intensified  faith  and 
imagination.  They  had  hoped  that  the  Messiah  would 
appear  in  some  member  of  the  Maccabean  house  —  in 
Judas  or  John  Hyrcanus.  But  they  had  been  bitterly 
disappointed.  The  "kingdom  of  the  saints,"  which 
had  risen  triumphant  over  the  ruins  of  Syria,  had 
turned  out  to  be  but  another  vulgar  monarchy,  and  the 
royal  high  priest  only  a  very  earthly  ruler,  more  in- 
terested in  foreign  alliances  and  in  conquered  cities 
than  in  the  Law.  And  at  last  a  Maccabee  had  turned 
his  arms  against  the  righteous !  With  one  accord 
Pharisaism  looked  to  its  Bible  for  encouragement. 
In  the  house  of  David  there  was  some  hope,  but  in 
the  visions  of  Daniel  more.  The  Son  of  Man,  whom 
the  prophet  saw,  would  certainly  once  more  be  seen. 
He  would  come  to  judge  the  world,  to  champion  and 
avenge  the  oppressed,  to  bring  to  life  all  those  in 
Sheol,  and  give  the  righteous  the  earth  for  an  inheri- 
tance. A  new  kingdom  would  be  founded  in  the  place 
of  the  Maccabean,  composed  exclusively  of  the  right- 
eous, forever  prosperous  and  resplendent  because  of 
the  immediate  presence  of  the  Lord  of  Spirits,  Jeho- 
vah Himself.1 

It  was  this  intense  Pharisaism,  as  full  of  revenge  as 
of  faith,  that  came  into  power  in  the  person  of  Alex- 
ander's widow,  Alexandra  (78-69  B.C.).  She  must 
have  been  no  ordinary  woman  who  now,  after  having 

1  For  an  elaborate  portrayal  of  the  Messiah  of  the  Similitudes, 
see  Charles  on  46  :  3. 


THE  STRUGGLE  OF  THE  PHARISEES         87 

made  her  husband  king  and  high  priest,  established 
her  son  Hyrcanus  in  the  high-priesthood,  reversed  the 
family  policy,  and  abandoned  the  Sadducees.  Jose- 
phus  himself,  misogynist  though  he  is,  pauses  to  admit 
that  notwithstanding  all  her  faults  "  she  showed  no 
sign  of  the  weakness  of  her  sex,"  and  that  "  she  pre- 
served the  nation  in  peace."  l  In  large  measure,  prob- 
ably, this  success  was  due  to  her  reliance  upon  the 
Pharisees,  who  had  great  influence  over  the  people.2 
But,  notwithstanding  the  increased  power  of  the 
Gerousia,  Alexandra  was  no  puppet,  and  was,  as  she 
appears  on  her  coins,  a  queen.3 

Secure  in  the  favour  of  this  energetic  ruler,  the  Pharisaic 
Pharisees  began  at  once  the  reorganisation  of  the  reforms- 
state.  First  of  all  they  released  those  of  their  number 
who  had  been  imprisoned,  and  recalled  those  who  had 
been  banished.  But  their  desire  for  revenge  did  not 
allow  them  to  stop  at  such  beginnings.  There  began 
a  systematic  assassination  of  Sadducean  leaders,  which 
especially  sought  to  cut  off  the  officers  of  Alexandra, 
who  had  had  a  share  in  the  crucifixion  of  the  eight 
hundred.  So  extensive  did  this  mafia  become  that 
the  old  generals  of  Alexander  requested  Alexandra  to 
allow  them  to  leave  Jerusalem  and  find  safety  in 
control  of  the  frontier  fortresses  —  a  request  that  when 
granted  put  into  the  hands  of  Sadducean  sympathisers 
all  the  strongholds  except  Hyrcanium,  Machaerus,  and 
Alexandrium.  It  is  doubtful  when  this  request  was 
granted,  and  whether  it  was  a  part  of  a  widespread 
plot  to  gain  the  kingdom  for  Aristobulus ;  but  it  was  to 
prove  serviceable  when  such  a  plot  came  to  be  formed, 
toward  the  end  of  Alexandra's  reign.  But  peace 
prevailed  throughout  the  nine  years  of  Alexandra's 

1  Ant.  xiii.  16  :  6.  2  Ant.  xiii.  16 :  2. 

8  Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  91.     Compare  the  attitude  of 
the  high  priest,  Ant.  xiii.  16  :  5. 


88      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Foreign 
affairs. 


Further  de- 
of  Judaism. 


reign  —  thanks  to  her  connection  with  the  Pharisees, 
and  her  mercenaries.  Unlike  those  of  her  husband, 
however,  these  troops  were  used  but  little  except  for 
preserving  the  peace,  for  Alexandra  was  as  sagacious 
^n  foreign  relations  as  Alexander  had  been  headstrong. 
Once  only  does  she  seem  to  have  undertaken  a  war. 
Then  she  sent  her  younger  son,  Aristobulus,  who 
possessed  many  of  his  father's  characteristics,  to  aid 
Damascus  in  a  struggle  with  a  petty  tyrant,  Ptolemy 
Mennaeus.1  The  invasion  of  Tigranes  (70-69  B.C.)  for 
a  moment  threatened  real  danger,  but  Alexandra  won 
his  friendship  by  rich  presents,  and  the  interference 
of  the  Romans  soon  made  her  doubly  secure. 

That,  however,  which  made  the  reign  of  Alexandra 
°^  most  significance,  was  the  new  stage  in  the  develop- 
ment of  Judaism  consequent  upon  the  ascendancy  of 
the  Pharisees.  To  the  two  classes  of  which  the  Ge- 
rousia  had  been  composed,  hereditary  nobles  of  the 
Sadducean  party  and  hereditary  priests,  there  now 
was  added  —  or  probably  more  accurately  recognised 
as  belonging  —  a  third  class,  that  of  the  rabbis.  From 
this  time  forth  we  can  trace  the  judicial  influence 
of  rabbinical  Pharisaism.  As  members  of  a  judicial 
body,  the  Pharisees  sent  their  old  enemies  into  ban- 
ishment, and  made  the  oral  tradition,  which  had  grown 
up  within  the  circle  of  literati,  the  law  of  the  land.2 
Over  this  body  the  young  Hyrcanus  presided  as  high 
priest,  but  so  utterly  lacking  was  he  in  energy  that 
Simon  ben  Shetach,  the  queen's  brother,  was  its  real, 
though  unofficial,  head.3  Associated  with  him  in  his 

1  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  311,  regards  the  expedition  as  directed 
against  Damascus  itself.    This  is  impossible  on  the  basis  of  Ant. 
xiii.  16  :  3.     That  Damascus  was  under  the  protection  of  Judea 
at  this  time  is  implied  by  War,  i.  5  :  3. 

2  Ant.  xiii.  16  :  2. 

8  This  much  is  true  in  the  statements  of  the  later  rabbis,  that 
the  presiding  officer  of  the  Gerousia  was  the  Nasi  rather  than 


THE  STBUGGLE  OF  THE  PHAEISEES         89 

reforms  was  Judah  ben  Tabbai,  who  had  been  induced 
to  come  to  Jerusalem  from  Alexandria  for  this  pur- 
pose.1 Under  their  influence  the  Gerousia  expunged 
the  severe  laws  of  the  Sadducees ;  ordered  more  care 
to  be  given  the  examination  of  witnesses ;  and  made 
divorce  more  difficult  by  the  provision  that  the  hus- 
band must  give  the  wife  he  put  away  some  portion 
of  his  property.  Every  feast  was  better  celebrated  Halcyon 
as  a  potent  reminder  of  the  Pharisees'  triumph  over  Pharisaism 
their  opponents,  and  that  of  the  Wood  Gathering  in 
August  as  a  new  impulse  to  matrimony  and  patriot- 
ism. The  support  of  the  national  worship  in  the 
temple  was  made  secure  by  the  levying  of  the  "  half- 
shekel  "  upon  all  Jews  above  the  age  of  twenty, 
whether  in  Palestine  or  the  Dispersion,  and  what  was 
perhaps  most  important  of  all,  the  foundations  of  later 
scribism  were  laid  by  the  establishment  of  public 
schools,  which  a  century  later  were  to  be  universal  in 
Palestine.2  It  was,  in  truth,  a  golden  age  in  the  eyes 
of  the  scribes  —  a  time  when  all  things  prospered  and 
Jehovah  was  so  propitious  that  the  scribes  preserved 
the  grains  of  wheat,  each  as  large  as  a  kidney,  to  show 
later  generations  how  righteousness  exalts  a  nation, 
and  how  sin  curses  the  ground. 

But  the  inevitable  reaction  came.     Oppressed  and  Thereac- 
persecuted  in  their  turn,  the  Sadducees  yet  held  pos-  tlon< 

the  high  priest.  Graetz,  II.  49,  and  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  102, 
accept  the  rabbinical  statement.  Wellhausen,  Pharisder  und 
Sadducaer,  29-43,  Israelitische  und  judische  Geschichte,  Holtz- 
mann,  Neutestamentliche  Zeitgeschichte,  175,  and  Schtirer,  Div. 
II.  I.  181,  as  distinctly  and  on  better  grounds  deny  it. 

1  According  to  Bab.  Chagigah  II.  1,  the  invitation  sent  him 
began:  "Jerusalem  the  great  to  Alexandria  the  little.     How 
long  shall  my  betrothed  abide  with  thee,  while  I  remain  for- 
saken ?"  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  102  n. 

2  Ketouboth,  8  : 1.    See  Graetz,  II.  48-55  ;  Derenbourg,  His- 
toire, 102-113  ;  Simon,  IS  Education  juive. 


90      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

session  of  most  of  the  fortresses  of  the  land,  and  at 
the  first  evidence  of  the  old  queen's  illness,  hastened 
to  prepare  a  revolt  that  should  prevent  the  permanent 
ascendancy  of  the  Gerousia.  Hyrcanus  II  was  too 
weak  and  too  subservient  to  Simon  for  their  pur- 
poses, and  they  turned  to  his  younger  brother  Aristo- 
bulus,  whose  hostility  to  the  Pharisees  was  already 
Death  of  open.  With  the  death  of  Alexandra  the  struggle  be- 
exan  ra.  ^ween  ^e  ^wo  parties  burst  forth  as  fiercely  as  dur- 
ing the  days  of  Alexander  Jannseus,  and  under  the 
leadership  of  the  two  brothers  Judea  plunged  anew 
into  a  civil  war  that  once  more  established  foreign, 
rule. 


CHAPTEE  VIII 

THE  ROMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA1 

HOWEVER  legitimate  a  successor  of  his  mother  the 
young  high  priest,  Hyrcanus,  may  have  been,  it  is 
clear  that  the  sympathies  of  his  troops  were  with 
their  old  commanders,  for  when  he  and  Aristobulus 
met  in  battle  at  Jericho,  many  of  his  soldiers  deserted 
to  the  enemy,  and  Hyrcanus  himself  was  forced  to  Defeat  of 


flee  to  Jerusalem.     There  he  gained  possession  of  the          * 


temple  area  and  of  the  citadel  in  which  the  wife  and  sion  of 

,.!-,  n    »    •    ,    T     i        i-ii  •          '  -,1        A  -i  Aristobulus. 

children  of  Aristobulus  had  been  imprisoned  by  Alex- 
andra. Probably  because  of  these  circumstances  Aris- 
tobulus was  not  eager  to  push  his  advantage,  and 
within  three  months  from  the  death  of  their  mother2 
the  two  brothers  came  to  an  amicable  agreement.  The 
kingdom  and  high-priesthood  were  taken  by  Aristobu- 
lus,3 and  the  weak  Hyrcanus,  reduced  to  a  mere  private 
citizen,  was  left  to  the  enjoyment  of  his  fortune.4 

And  thus  affairs  might  have  remained  but  for  the 
appearance  of  an  extraordinary  man,  Antipater,  an  Antipater. 
Idumean,  whose  father  had  been  governor  of  Idumea 
under  Alexander  Jannseus  and  Alexandra.5    For  some 

1  General  References  :  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  313-325  ;  Graetz, 
History  of  the  Jews,  II.  57-71  ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V. 
394-406  ;  Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  ix.  ch.  14. 

2  Ant.  xv.  6:4.  3  Ant.  xv.  3  :  1;  xx.  10. 

4  Ant.  xiv.  1:2;   War,  i.  6  :  1. 

5  Ant.  xiv.  1  :  3  ;   War,  i.  6  :  2.     Ewald,  V.  397,  on  the  basis 
of  Eusebius,  does  not  hesitate  to  declare  Antipater  a  citizen  of 
Ascalon,  who  had  been  made  a  governor  of  Idumea  ;  cf.  Schtirer's 
exhaustive  note,  Div.  I.  I.  314. 

91 


92      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

reason,  perhaps  from  suspicion  of  Aristobulus  II,  lie 
attached  himself  to  Hyrcanus,  and  endeavoured  to 
rouse  him  into  something  like  self-respect,  if  not  re- 
volt. At  first  his  efforts  were  unavailing,  but  at  last 
he  persuaded  Hyrcanus  that  his  brother  threatened 
his  life,  and  induced  him  to  flee  to  Aretas,  king  of 
Arabia.  Once  secure  in  the  friendly  court  at  Petra, 
Antipater  found  no  difficulty  in  persuading  Hyrcanus 
to  ask  aid  from  Aretas  against  Aristobulus.  The 
king  consented,  but  demanded  the  return  of  the  terri- 
tory and  the  twelve  cities  Alexander  had  taken.1 
These  terms  once  granted,  Aretas,  Antipater,  and  Hyr- 
Civilwar  canus,  at  the  head  of  fifty  thousand  men,  marched 
against  Aristobulus,  defeated  him,  and  drove  him  into 
the  temple  and  citadel  of  Jerusalem.  There  they 
besieged  him,  Jerusalem  itself  being  divided,  the  peo- 
ple favouring  Hyrcanus,  but  the  priests,  Aristobulus. 
The  struggle  was  carried  on  with  great  bitterness  — 
the  first  war  for  succession  in  the  history  of  the  Mac- 
cabean  house.  The  principal  Jews  deserted  the  city 
and  went  to  Egypt;  but  neither  party  would  yield. 
Cruelty  and  bad  faith  increased  the  madness,  while  a 
furious  storm  —  due,  as  the  priests  believed,  to  the  im- 
piety of  the  besiegers  —  brought  a  famine  upon  the 
entire  land.2 

Approach  of  Doubtless,  sooner  or  later,  Aristobulus  must  have 
Pompey.  yielded,  if  only  from  hunger;  but  before  such  an 
extremity  was  reached  a  new  factor  appeared  in  Jew- 
ish politics.  For  years  the  Romans  had  been  closing 
in  upon  the  Syrian  and  neighbouring  kingdoms,  and  at 
last  the  desperate  struggles  of  Tigranes  had  led  to  the 
expedition  of  Pompey.  Armed  with  unprecedented 
powers,  Pompey  had  succeeded  in  reducing  Asia  to 
something  like  order,  and  in  65  B.C.  sent  his  general, 

i  Ant.  xiv.  1 :  3,  4.  2  Ant.  xiv.  2  : 2. 


THE  ROMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA          93 

Scaurus,  to  secure  Syria.  Scaurus  arrived  at  Damas- 
cus only  to  find  himself  anticipated  by  two  of  Pom- 
pey's  other  generals,  Lollius  and  Metellus.  At  once 
he  started  toward  Judea,  but  before  he  could  reach 
Jerusalem  the  two  brothers  heard  of  his  approach, 
and,  true  to  the  traditional  Roman  policy  of  their 
family,  each  sent  an  embassy,  promising  a  present 
of  400  talents  for  a  favourable  decision.  Scaurus 
decided  in  favour  of  Aristobulus,  as  his  seemed  to  be  The  decision 
the  more  promising  cause,  ordered  Aretas  to  return  to 
Arabia,  and  himself  returned  to  Damascus.  There- 
upon Aristobulus  attacked  the  besieging  force,  and  x*^" 
completely  defeated  it. 

Neither  party  regarded  the  quarrel  settled,  however, 
for  when  Pompey  himself  arrived  in  Syria,  in  the 
winter  of  64-63  B.C.,  Aristobulus  sent  him  ambas- 
sadors, and  a  wonderful  golden  vine  worth  500 
talents,  and  a  little  later  other  ambassadors  came 
from  Hyrcanus  and  Antipater.  Postponing  all  deci- 
sion, Pompey  devoted  himself  to  the  reduction  of  the 
petty  states  of  Coele-Syria,  and  in  the  spring  arrived 
in  Damascus.  There  the  representatives  of  the  two 
brothers  again  met  him,  and  with  them  those  of  the 
Pharisees,  who  requested  that  neither  brother  be  recog- 
nised as  king,  but  that  the  state  be  allowed  to  enjoy 
its  old  government  of  the  high  priest  and  G-erousia. 

The  latter  request  Pompey  seems  to  have  ignored, 
and  after  condemning  the  violent  proceedings  of  Aris- 
tobulus and  ordering  both  brothers  to  keep  the  peace, 
he  deferred  his  decision  until  he  had  made  an  expedi-  The  decision 
tion  against  the  Nabateans  and  had  then  come  into  of 
Judea.1    He  then  set  out  upon  his  campaign,  probably 
taking  Aristobulus  and  Hyrcanus  with  him.     When 
they  arrived  at  Dium,  however,  Aristobulus  suddenly 


94     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Revolt  of  fled  to  the  beautiful  fortress  of  Alexandrium,  just 
lus*  inside  the  borders  of  Judea.1  There  in  that  castle 
which  was  later  to  contain  the  bodies  of  so  many  of 
the  last  unhappy  Maccabees,2  he  proposed  to  stand  a 
siege.  He  was,  however,  forced  to  surrender  all  his 
fortresses  to  the  Boinans,  and  retired  in  a  rage  to 
Jerusalem  to  prepare  for  war. 

Hearing  of  this  revolution  Pompey  marched  down  to 
Jericho,  then  luxuriant  with  palms  and  balsams,  and, 
after  a  single  night's  rest,  went  up  to  Jerusalem. 
Again  Aristobulus  weakened,  came  out  to  meet  Pom- 
pey, and  promised  to  pay  over  a  large  sum  of  money 
and  to  surrender  the  city  if  only  the  Eomans  would 
leave  the  country  in  peace.  With  his  customary  will- 
ingness to  avoid  unnecessary  injury  to  a  dependent 
people,  Pompey  agreed  to  the  proposals,  and  sent 
Gabinius  to  receive  the  money  and  the  city.  But 
when  that  general  appeared  at  the  gates  of  Jerusalem, 
he  found  the  sympathies  of  its  inhabitants  divided. 
On  the  one  hand,  the  great  mass  of  the  population  was 
desirous  of  avoiding  bloodshed  and  of  receiving  the 
Eomans ;  but  on  the  other,  the  soldiers  of  Aristobulus 
would  listen  to  no  proposition  of  surrender,  closed  the 
gates  fast,  and  sent  Gabinius  back  to  Pompey  empty- 
handed.  Naturally  enraged  at  this  unfaithfulness, 
Pompey  threw  Aristobulus  into  chains,  and  proceeded 
against  Jerusalem.  Within  the  city,  the  party  of 

1  Ant.  xiv.  3:4.     It  was  near  Corea  (Karawa  according  to 
most  authorities,  though  Smith,  Historical  Geography,  353  n., 
wavers  between  it  and  Kuriyat),  and  probably  on  top  of  Surta- 
beh,  where  are  still  to  be  found  ruins  consisting  of  large,  drafted, 
rough-dressed  stones,  assigned  by  Badaeker-Socin,  Palestine 
and  Syria,  167,  to  the  Crusaders,  but  which  quite  as  likely  date 
from  an  earlier  period.     Karawa  is  perhaps  two  hours  north  of 
Surtabeh,  and  would  lie  upon  the  direct  route  from  Scythopolia 
to  Jericho. 

2  Josephus,  Ant.  xvi.  11 :  7. 


Capture  of 
Jerusalem 
by  Pompey. 


THE  ROMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA          95 

Aristobulus  seized  the  temple,  but  the  other  admitted 
Pompey's  army  into  the  city  proper.  Then  there 
began  the  siege  of  the  temple,  which  was  by  no 
means  successful  until,  taking  advantage  of  the  Jews' 
unwillingness  to  engage  in  offensive  operations  on  the 
Sabbath,  Pompey  was  able  to  build  a  great  bank  oppo- 
site the  north  wall  of  the  temple,  on  which  to  set  his 
artillery.  For  three  months  *  the  siege  continued,  but 
the  wall  was  broken  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  (Octo- 
ber, 63  B.C.),  and  the  Eomans  rushed  into  the  temple, 
butchering  the  priests  at  the  altar.  Twelve  thousand 
Jews  are  said  to  have  fallen.  Pompey,  with  a  few  of 
his  friends,  entered  the  Holy  of  Holies;  but  left  all 
the  treasure  of  the  temple,  amounting  to  2000  talents, 
untouched.  The  day  after  the  capture,  the  worship  Fate  of 
of  the  temple  began  again  at  his  command  with  Hyr-  Ari 
canus  II  as  high  priest.  Aristobulus  and  his  family 
graced  Pompey's  triumph  in  Borne,  and  large  numbers 
of  captives  were  carried  to  the  capital,  where  they 
raised  the  Jewish  colony  to  great  importance,2  even 
if  they  may  not  be  said  to  have  founded  it. 

Thus  almost  exactly  a  hundred  years  from  the  tri- 
umphs of  Judas  Maccabaeus,  and  only  eighty  since 
its  independence  was  fairly  achieved,  Judea  once  more 
and  finally  fell  into  the  control  of  a  foreign  power.  Reestablish- 
Before  leaving  the  country,  Pompey  stripped  it  of 
most  of  the  territory  won  since  the  days  of  Simon, 
and  made  the  remainder,  with  the  high  priest,  subject 
to  his  representative  in  Syria,  Scaurus,3  who  was  left 

1  So  is  to  be  interpreted  irepl  rplrov  wra,  Ant.  xiv.  4  : 3, 
rather  than  uthe  third  month,"  e.g.  Graetz,  II.  66. 

2  Compare  Cicero,  Pro  Flacco. 

8  The  cities  made  free  by  Pompey  were  Gadara  (which  he 
rebuilt  in  honour  of  one  of  his  freedmen),  Hippos,  Scythopolis, 
Gaza,  Joppa,  Dora,  Strato's  Tower  (Ant.  xiv.  4  : 4).  Augustus 
gave  many  of  them  back  to  Herod  I  (Ant.  xv.  7:3),  but  they 
seem  to  have  remained  strongly  an ti- Jewish,  War,  ii.  IS:  I. 


96     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Reorganisa- 
tion of 
Judea  by 
Gabinius. 


Feelings  of 
the  Jews. 


for  two  years1  in  charge  of  the  entire  region  be- 
tween Egypt  and  the  Euphrates,  with  full  praetorian 
power. 

Just  how  long  Hyrcanus  could  have  maintained  this 
somewhat  uncertain  position,  is  a  question ;  but  after 
six  years  the  revolt  of  Alexander,  the  son  of  Aristo- 
bulus,  led  to  a  thorough  reorganisation  of  the  govern- 
ment under  Gabinius,  who  at  that  time  (57  B.C.)  was  in 
charge  of  the  Roman  affairs  in  Syria.2 

Hyrcanus  was  left  in  possession  of  the  high-priest- 
hood, but  was  deprived  of  all  political  power,  which 
now,  quite  after  the  plans  of  the  Pharisees,  was  vested 
in  an  aristocracy*  Judea  was  divided  into  five  dis- 
tricts, at  the  head  of  each  of  which  was  the  council  of 
its  chief  city,  —  Jerusalem,  Gadara,  Amathus,  Jericho, 
Sepphoris.3 

These  councils  were  primarily  courts  (sanhedrins), 
but  in  addition  to  their  judicial  functions  probably 
had  charge  of  the  taxes  and  local  affairs,  and  were 
subject  to  the  proconsul  of  Syria. 

The  feelings  with  which  a  proud  people  thus  saw  a 
national  future  suddenly  disappear,  a  dynasty  removed, 
and  a  new  master  established,  appear  in  part  in  the 
bitter  comment  of  Josephus 4  upon  the  Asmonean  house, 
but  even  more  in  the  Psalms  of  the  PhariseeSj  or  as 
they  are  better  known,  the  Psalms  of  Solomon.5  In 
them  appear  alike  the  Pharisees'  contempt  for  the 
Asmonean  house,6  righteous  indignation  at  its  disloy- 

1  Ant.  xiv.  4  : 4,  5 ;  Schiirer,  I.  I.  339 ;  Lewin,  Fasti  Sacri, 
n.  101. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  5:4;    War,  i.  8  :  5. 

8  Amathus  was  probably  Amatha,  near  the  Jabbok,  about 
twenty  miles  south  of  Pella. 

4  Ant.  xiv.  4 :  5. 

6  Ryle  and  James,  The  Psalms  of  the  Pharisees;  Abrahams 
Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  IX.  539  sq. 

6  Ps.  1  :  8  ;  17  : 1-22. 


THE  ROMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA 


97 


alty  to  its  sacred  office,1  sorrow  for  the  miseries 
of  the  nation,2  and  complete  assurance  that  in  the 
death  of  Pompey  God  was  punishing  the  instrument 
of  his  wrath.3  Along  with  the  political  feeling  there 
ran  a  passionate  moral  indignation.4  Divine  punish- 
ment awaited  the  hypocrite  and  sinner,5  but  justifica- 
tion and  help  the  righteous.6  In  addition,  the  new 
conditions  so  unfavourable  to  any  political  career  made 
the  study  of  the  Thorah  a  matter  of  course.  "  Love 
work,  hate  authority,  and  do  not  press  thyself  upon 
the  great/7  was  the  advice  of  Shemaiah,  the  successor 
of  Simon  ben  Shetach,7  and  from  this  time  begins  a  new 
succession  of  great  teachers  of  scribism,  who  were 
almost  without  exception,  members  of  the  Pharisaic 
society. 

With  this  transformation  there  went  of  necessity 
the  end  of  political  struggles  between  the  Pharisees  and 
the  Sadducees.  Neither  could  now  hope  for  victory 
over  the  other  and  were  at  one  in  their  hatred  of  the 
Bornans.  Yet  each  still  pursued  its  own  ends,  and  in 
the  region  of  religion,  at  least,  their  old  conflict.  The 
Pharisee  grew  more  intense  in  his  search  for  righteous- 
ness in  accordance  with  the  oral  law,  the  Sadducee 
grew  more  content  to  point  out  the  weaknesses  of  his 
opponent,  to  annoy  him  by  subtle  questions,  and  to 
await  stoically  the  decrees  of  Providence.  To  each 
alike  God  seemed  to  grow  farther  away.  If  the  Sad- 
ducee introduced  a  mediatory  Wisdom,  the  Pharisee 
saw  his  God  only  at  the  end  of  an  interminable  suc- 
cession of  duties,  and  represented  on  earth  by  his 

IPs.  1  :8;  2:3;  7:2;  8:13,  14,26. 

2  Ps.  2  : 1,  6,  13.  *  Ps.  4  : 16-25. 

8  Ps.  2  :  30-35  ;  cf .  8  : 15,  16.  5  4  :  1-8;  15  :  7-14. 

6  4 :  9,  26-29  ;  6:1-7;  16 :  14,  15. 

7  Pirqe  Aboth,  10.    Abtalion  was  the  other  member  of  this 
"  couple." 


Psalms  of 
the  Phari- 


Unpolitical 
rabbinism. 


New  phase 
of  Pharisa- 
ism and 
Saddu- 
ceeism. 


98      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

word  (memra;  bath  qol).1  Bighteousness  became  in- 
creasingly dependent  upon  rabbinical  learning  —  a 
possession  possible  only  to  the  aristocracy  of  the 
schools.  God  himself  became  a  rabbi,  read  every 
Sabbath  in  the  Bible,  and  became  entangled  in  an  all- 
embracing  scholasticism. 

The  Mes-  Yet,  through  this  arid  legalism  bred  of  thought  that 

sianic  hope.  ln  ,     ,       .,,          , . , .         ,,  ., 

could  not  deal  with  politics,  there  ran  a  genuinely 

spiritual  hope.  Sick  at  heart  of  all  attempts  to  found 
a  political  kingdom,  the  faith  of  Pharisaism  looked 
more  eagerly  for  the  coming  of  King  Messiah.  The 
misery  of  the  days  that  stirred  the  indignation  of  the 
writer  of  the  Psalms  of  the  Pharisees,  brought  with 
it  also  the  lesson  that  God's  kingdom  must  be  some- 
thing other  than  that  of  the  Asmoneans.  From  this 
conviction  there  burst  the  splendid  vision  of  a  new 
kingdom  of  saints :  — 

The  Messiah   And  a  righteous  king  and  taught  of  God  is  he  that  reigneth 

°J  t]}e       ,  over  them. 

Psalms  of  ,  .,  i    n  i  .....,.,  ,,    .         .  ,  , 

the  Phari-      And  there  shall  be  no  iniquity  in  his  days  in  their  midst ; 

sees.  for  all  shall  be  holy  and  their  king  is  the  Lord  Messiah. 

For  he  shall  not  put  his  trust  in  horse  and  rider  and  bow ; 

nor  shall  he  multiply  unto  himself  gold  and  silver  for 

war ;  nor  by  ships  shall  he  gather  confidence  for  the  day 

of  battle. 
The  Lord  himself  is  his  king,  and  the  hope  of  him  that  is 

strong  in  the  hope  of  God. 
And  he  shall  have  mercy  upon  all  nations  that  come  to  him 

in  fear. 
He  himself  also  is  pure  from  sin,  so  that  he  may  rule  a 

mighty  people,  and  rebuke  princes  and  overthrow  sinners, 

by  the  might  of  his  word. 
And  who  can  stand  up  against  him  ? 
He  is  mighty  in  his  works  and  strong  in  the  fear  of  God, 

1  Baldensperger,    Das    Selbstbewusstsein    Jesu,   chs.   1,  2 ; 
Weber,  Lehre  des  Talmud,  ch.  13. 


THE  EOMAN  CONQUEST  OF  JUDEA          99 

Tending  the  flocks  of  the  Lord  with  faith  and  righteousness ; 
and  he  shall  suffer  none  to  faint  in  their  pasture.1 

Henceforth  the  Messianic  hope  in  the  hearts  of  many 
Pharisees  grew  less  political,  and  in  its  stead  there  is 
to  be  seen  a  desperate  belief  that  the  new  and  glorious 
kingdom  must  await  the  triumph  of  the  Law  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead.  That  this  eschatological  hope 
was  not  the  hope  of  the  people  at  large,  goes  without 
saying.  That  it  could  not  steady  a  people  under  ex- 
treme provocation  was,  unfortunately,  also  to  appear. 

1  Psalms  of  the  Pharisees,  17.  On  the  Messianic  hope  in  general 
see  Delitzsch,  The  Messianic  Prophecies  in  Historical  Succes- 
sion; Briggs,  Messianic  Prophecy;  Drummond,  The  Jewish 
and  Christian  Messiah  ;  Adeney,  The  Hebrew  Utopia :  A  Study 
of  Messianic  Prophecy ;  Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy :  Its  Ori- 
gin, Historical  Growth,  and  Relation  to  New  Testament  Fulfil- 
ment; Hiihn,  Die  messianischen  Weissagungen,  etc. ;  Schiirer, 
G-eschichte  des  judischen  Volkes  (3ded.),  II.  496-555;  Weber, 
Lehre  des  Talmud,  chs.  21,  22. 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE    RISE    OF    THE    HOUSE    OF    ANTIPATER l 


Rise  of 

Antipater. 


Antipater's 
services  to 
Rome. 


DURING  the  ten  years  of  political  decadence  that 
followed  the  Eoman  conquest  of  Judea,  the  weak 
Hyrcanus  came  increasingly  under  the  control  of  his 
self-appointed  patron,  Antipater.  The  aid  he  was 
able  to  render  to  Scaurus  in  bringing  Aretas  to  terms2 
gave  Antipater  new  importance;  but  even  more  was 
obtained  from  his  services  during  the  attempt  of  Aris- 
tobulus  II  to  reinstate  himself  on  the  throne,  after 
his  escape  from  Eome  in  56  B.C.,  and,  later,  when 
Gabinius,  at  the  command  of  Pompey,  gave  up  his 
expedition  against  the  Parthians  in  order  to  reinstate 
Ptolemy  Auletes  in  Egypt,  he  not  only  furnished  the 
Eoman  forces  with  supplies,  weapons,  and  money,  but 
won  over  the  Jews  who  controlled  the  passes  lead- 
ing to  Egypt.3  Afterward,  when  Alexander,  the  son 
of  Aristobulus  II,  had  again  undertaken  to  head  a 
revolt  against  Eome,  Antipater  was  sent  by  Gabinius 
to  the  Jews  who  favoured  the  movement,  if  possible, 
to  prevent  the  revolt  becoming  universal.4  In  this  Anti- 
pater was  successful,  although  he  could  not  win  over 
Alexander  himself.  In  return,  he  seems  to  have  been 

1  General  References :  Schiirer,    The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  370-391 ;  Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  II.  74-83 ;   Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel, 
bk.  x.  ch.  1 ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  402-406. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  5:1.        3  Ant.  xiv.  6:2.          4  Ant.  xiv.  6  :  3. 

100 


RISE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  ANTIPATER      101 

put  in  charge  of  the  finances  of  Judea,1  and  Gabinius 
seems  to  have  followed  his  advice  implicitly  in  deal- 
ing with  the  affairs  of  Jerusalem.2  Antipater,  in  the 
meantime,  also  made  friends  among  influential  men 
generally,  and  especially  with  the  king  of  Arabia,  one 
of  whose  relations,  Cyprus,  he  married.3  Yet,  through- 
out these  years  he  never  attempted  to  remove  Hyrcanus 
from  the  high-priesthood,  and,  although  dictating  his 
policy,  seems  to  have  shown  him  the  utmost  respect.4 

This  growing  importance  of  Antipater  saved  the  Judea  dur- 
Jews  from  the  miseries  that  might  have  befallen  them  wars!6  Civil 
under  the  first  triumvirate  and  during  the  Civil  Wars, 
although  Antipater  was  unable  to  prevent  the  avari- 
cious Crassus  from  plundering  the  temple  in  direct 
violation  of  his  oath  not  to  take  more  than  what  was 
offered  him.5  From  this  time  Syria  was  in  miniature 
the  Eoman  republic.  Most  of  the  great  leaders  of  the 
struggles  begun  by  Caesar  and  Pompey  at  some  time 
were  within  its  limits.  And  what  was  true  of  Syria 
was  almost  equally  true  of  Palestine.  At  first  Anti- 
pater favoured  Pompey,  while  Aristobulus  and  his  sons 
were  supported  by  Caesar.  But  the  friends  of  Pompey 
succeeded  in  poisoning  Aristobulus  II  just  as  he  was 
departing  for  Palestine  at  the  head  of  two  legions 
given  him  by  Caesar/  and  shortly  after  the  father-in- 
law  of  Pompey,  getting  possession  of  Alexander,  be- 
headed him  at  Antioch.  After  the  defeat  and  death 
of  Pompey,  however,  Hyrcanus  and  Antipater  imme- 
diately changed  sides  and  supported  Caesar.  Fortu-  Antipater 
nately,  they  were  able  to  render  him  decisive  aid. 
At  the  moment  when  Caesar's  affairs  were  desperate  at 

1  He  is  called  procurator,  ^rt/ieX^rifc,  in  Ant.  xiv.  8  : 1,  3. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  6:4.          8  War,  i.  8  :  9.          4  Ant.  xiv.  8  : 1. 

5  Ant.  xiv.  7:1.    Altogether,  Crassus  robbed  the  temple  of 
gold  to  the  value  of  10,000  talents. 

6  Ant.  xiv.  7  :  4. 


102     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Antipater's 
service  to 
Caesar. 


Caesar's  re- 
organiza- 
tion of 
Judea. 


Alexandria,  Antipater  heard  that  Caesar's  ally,  Mith- 
ridates,  was  unable  to  move  beyond  Askelon  because 
of  the  enmity  of  the  border  tribes,  and  especially  of 
the  city  of  Pelusium.  He  immediately  took  a  force  of 
three  thousand  men  and  marched  to  his  relief.  In  a 
surprising  way  he  became  for  a  moment  one  of  the  de- 
termining factors  in  universal  history.  He  won  over 
the  Arabs  and  Syrians  from  Lebanon  to  the  desert ; 
led  the  storming  party  that  broke  down  the  wall  of 
Pelusium ;  by  means  of  letters  from  the  high  priest, 
won  over  the  Jews  of  Egypt  who  had  been  at  first 
hostile  to  Caesar,  so  that  they  not  only  allowed  the 
passage  of  the  troops,  but  supplied  them  with  provi- 
sions ;  and,  finally,  in  the  decisive  battle  that  gave  Caesar 
control  of  Egypt,  snatched  victory  out  of  defeat  by 
coming  to  the  aid  of  Mithridates  just  as  his  forces 
were  being  put  to  flight.1  When  the  news  of  these 
services  reached  Caesar,  he  readily  overlooked  the  past 
and  won  Antipater  over  more  completely  by  the  prom- 
ise of  further  service  and  reward.2  But  more  impor- 
tant, in  gratitude  for  the  services  of  Antipater,  Caesar 
restored  to  the  Jews  many  of  their  privileges  which 
Pompey  had  destroyed.  Instead  of  favouring  Antigo- 
nus,  the  younger  son  of  Aristobulus  II,  who  urged 
that  he  be  given  the  kingdom  of  which  he  complained 
Antipater  and  Hyrcanus  had  deprived  him,  Caesar  con- 
firmed Hyrcanus  as  hereditary  high  priest3  (possibly 
he  had  already  appointed  him  hereditary  ethnarch4), 

1  Ant.  xiv.  8  : 1,  2. 

2  It  can  hardly  be  true,  as  Strabo  reports  {Ant.  xiv.  8:3), 
that  Hyrcanus  accompanied  Antipater  on  this  expedition.     Jo- 
sephus  seems  somewhat  doubtful  as  to  the  truth  of  the  state- 
ment, and  does  not  speak  as  if  Hyrcanus  was  present  when 
Antigonus  presented  his  charges,  Ant.  xiv.  8  : 4. 

8  Josephus  speaks  twice  of  this  appointment  {Ant.  xiv.  8  :  3 
and  5)  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that  the  two  statements  do 
not  refer  to  the  same  act  of  Caesar.  *  Ant.  xiv.  10 :  2. 


RISE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  ANTIPATEE      103 

and  made  Antipater  a  Roman  citizen  and  procurator 
of  Judea.1  It  also  appears  that  some  of  its  old  judi- 
cial rights  were  returned  to  the  Gerousia.2  He  further 
granted  Hyrcanus  the  right  to  rebuild  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem,3  abolished  the  divisions  of  Gabinius,  gave 
the  Jews  freedom  from  supporting  Roman  soldiers  or  Privileges 
furnishing  auxiliaries,  a  reduction  of  their  tribute  dur-  Jews.6 
ing  the  sabbatical  year,4  and  the  possession  of  Joppa.5 
Subsequently  several  other  places  were  restored ;  the 
Jews  were  termed  the  confederates  of  the  Romans ; 6 
their  religious  customs  were  still  fully  guaranteed 
them,  not  alone  in  Judea,  but  in  Alexandria  and  else- 
where, and  their  feasts  were  excepted  from  legislation 
against  "  Bacchanal  rioting,"  both  in  Rome  itself  and 
in  the  provinces.  The  Jews  of  Alexandria  were  fur- 
ther recognised  as  citizens  of  that  place.7  In  the  light 
of  these  privileges  it  is  little  wonder  that  the  Jews 
should  have  been  among  the  most  sincere  mourners  of 
Caesar's  death. 

Thus    established   as   representative   of   Rome   in  New  offices 
Judea,  at  least  coordinate  with  the  high  priest,  Anti-  of  Antipater 
pater  at  once  proceeded  to  build  up  the  fortunes  of  his 
family,  as  well  as  to  restore  tranquillity  to  Judea. 
His  son,  Phasaelus,  he  made  governor  of  Jerusalem 
and  its  surrounding  country ;  while  Herod,  his  younger 
son,  he  put  in  charge  of  Galilee.     An  opportunity  for 
displaying  his  energy  met  Herod  at  the  outset  of  his 

1  War,  i.  10  : 1-3.  3  ^nt.  xiv.  8  :  5. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  9  :  3-5.  *Ant.  xiv.  10  :  5,  6. 

6  It  is  possible  that  the  latter  half  of  Ant.  xiv.  10  :  6  belongs  to 
a  decree  of  the  Senate  of  44  B.C.,  but  the  first  half,  at  least,  cer- 
tainly belongs  to  47.  See  Schtirer,  Div.  1. 1*  381  n.,  and  refer- 
ences there  given. 

6  Ant.  xiv.  10  :  8. 

7  Ant.  xiv.  10  : 1.    This  does  not  mean  that  they  were  made 
Roman  citizens,  but  that  the  status  they  had  enjoyed  since  the 
founding  of  the  city  was  confirmed. 


104     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Herod  in 
Galilee. 


Herod  tried 
by  the 
Sanhedrin. 


administration  in  Galilee.  Ezekias,  a  captain  of  a 
large  band  of  robbers,  —  or  quite  as  likely,  rebels,  — 
had  made  himself  the  scourge  of  the  neighbouring  re- 
gions of  Syria.  Herod  came  upon  him,  captured  him, 
and  executed  him  together  with  a  number  of  his  follow- 
ers, to  the  great  delight  of  the  Syrians.  Phasaelus,  not 
to  be  outdone  by  his  brother,  devoted  himself  to  the 
administration  of  Jerusalem,  and  in  his  turn  won  new 
honour  and  popularity  for  his  family,  and  especially 
for  his  father.1  Herod's  prompt  punishment  of  Ezekias, 
however,  met  with  the  disapproval  of  the  Council  or 
Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem,  which  seems  to  have  pos- 
sessed the  exclusive  power  of  life  and  death  in  Galilee, 
as  well  as  in  Judea  proper,2  and  aided  by  the  demands 
of  the  mothers  of  the  men  who  had  been  killed,  the 
Sanhedrin  persuaded  Hyrcanus  to  order  Herod  to 
come  to  Jerusalem  for  trial.  At  the  advice  of  Antipa- 
ter,  the  young  man  came  attended  by  a  bodyguard  of 
considerable  size.  Just  how  the  case  might  have 
turned  is  not  certain,  for  Sextus  Caesar,  the  governor 
of  Syria,  wrote  Hyrcanus  threatening  trouble  unless 
Herod  was  acquitted;  and  as  the  sentence  of  death 
was  about  to  be  pronounced  by  the  court,  Hyrcanus 
adjourned  the  session  until  the  next  day.3  During  the 

1  Ant.  xiv.  9  : 2,  3. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  9  :  3-5.     In  the  reorganisation  of  Judea  by  Caesar 
the  local  o-wtSpia  established  by  Gabinius  would  very  likely  be 
held  subordinate,  at  least  judicially,  to  the  <rvvt5piov  of  Jerusa- 
lem, over  which  the  ethnarch  presided.    This  is  the  first  appear- 
ance of  the  Hebraised  Greek  word  Sanhedrin  with  reference  to 
the  Council  of  Jerusalem.    Probably  it  refers  especially  to  its 
judicial  powers,  which  doubtless  had  continued  after  the  Gerou- 
sia  had  lost  its  administrative  functions.     See  Marquardt,  Eo- 
mische  Staatsverwaltung,  I.  500  sq. 

.  3  Ant.  xiv.  9  :  5.  Very  possibly  Hyrcanus  was  acting  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  rules  of  order  of  the  Sanhedrin.  At  any 
rate,  a  few  years  later  it  was  contrary  to  its  rules  to  pass  the 


(UNIVERSITY 


OF 

OF  ANTIPATEE     105 

night  Herod  took  the  advice  of  Hyrcanus  and  fled  to  Herod  in 
Damascus,  where  he  bought  from  Sextus  Caesar  the  syna> 
position  of  general  of  the  army  of   Coele-Syria,   and 
prepared  to  make  war  on  Hyrcanus.     From  this  pur- 
pose,   however,    he    was  deterred  by  Antipater  and 
Phasaelus,1  and  for  several  months  was  apparently  en- 
gaged in  aiding  Sextus  Caesar  in  quieting  Syria,  where 
the  party  of  Caesar  was  not  yet  supreme. 

In  46  B.C.,  however,  the  friends  of  Pompey,  in 
that  province,  gathered  about  Caecilius  Bassus,  killed 
Sextus  Caesar  and  began  a  civil  war,  whose  outcome 
finally  came  to  depend  upon  the  siege  of  Apamaea, 
where  the  Pompeians  had  concentrated  (45  B.C.).  In 
this  struggle  Antipater  sent  troops  to  aid  the  party  of 
Caesar,  but  no  decided  advantage  had  been  won  by  the 
new  governor  of  the  province,  L.  Statius  Murcus,  when 
Caesar  himself  was  assassinated  March  15,  44  B.C.  In 
the  civil  war  that  followed,  Lucius  Cassius  went  to  Cassius  in 
Syria  to  raise  troops  and  funds  in  behalf  of  the  con-  syria- 
spirators.  No  sooner  had  he  arrived  than  both  Mur- 
cus and  Bassus  at  Apamaea  went  over  to  him.2  Pos- 
sessed thus  of  Syria,  Cassius  proceeded  at  once  to  levy 
exorbitant  taxes  upon  the  unfortunate  provincials, 
Judea's  quota  being  set  at  700  talents.  Antipater 
attempted  no  resistance  to  the  new  ruler,  but  seized 
the  opportunity  of  proving  the  serviceableness  of  his 
family.  He  at  once  set  about  the  collection  of  this  New  taxes, 
sum,  dividing  the  task  among  Phasaelus,  Herod,  and 
his  enemy  Malichus.  Herod  showed  so  much  zeal 
in  collecting  the  portion  that  fell  to  Galilee  that 
Cassius  reappointed  him  general  of  Coele-Syria,  giving 
him  both  land  forces  and  a  fleet.3 

death  sentence  until  after  a  night  had  passed  since  the  trial, 
Sanhedrin,  iv.  1 ;  v.  5. 

1  Ant.  xiv.  9:5.  2  Ant.  xiv.  11  : 2. 

8  Ant.  xiv.  11  : 4.    The  quota  of  some  of  the  Judean  cities 


106      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Murder  of  The  withdrawal  of  Cassius  from  Judea  was  followed 
Antipater.  ^y  ^Q  murder  of  Antipater.  Malichus,  apparently  one 
of  the  numerous  Jews  who  wished  a  reinstatement 
of  the  old  theocratic  government  under  Hyrcanus,1 
some  time  previously  had  attempted  to  put  Antipater 
out  of  the  way,  but  had  been  detected  and  forgiven. 
But  when  the  future  of  Eoman  control  seemed  threat- 
ened, Malichus  renewed  his  conspiracy  and  succeeded 
in  poisoning  Antipater  as  he  was  dining  with  Hyrca- 
nus (43  B.C.),  and  immediately  attempted  to  head  a 
revolt.  Thereupon,  with  the  connivance  and  even  en- 
couragement pf  Cassius,  Herod  had  him  assassinated  at 
Tyre,  to  the  speechless  astonishment  of  Hyrcanus,2  who 
now  came  under  the  control  of  Phasaelus  and  Herod. 
Disorders  in  The  final  withdrawal  of  Cassius  from  Syria  was 
Judea.  followed  by  general  disorder.  The  Roman  command- 

ant, Felix,  attempted  to  put  Phasaelus  under  arrest, 
but  was  defeated  even  before  Herod  could  send  his 
brother  aid ;  the  party  of  Malichus,  more  or  less  with 
the  support  of  Hyrcanus,  broke  into  revolt  and  occu- 
pied several  castles,  chief  among  which  was  Masada ; 
Antigonus,  son  of  Aristobulus  II.,  endeavoured  to 
regain  Judea  for  his  family,  with  the  aid  of  Ptolemy, 
the  son  of  Mennaeus  of  Chalcis,  while  Marion,  the 
tyrant  of  Tyre,  not  only  aided  Antigonus,  but  himself 
captured  three  fortresses  in  Galilee.3 

—  of  Gophna,  Emmaus,  Lydda,  and  Thamna  —  was  not  raised, 
and  Cassius  sold  their  inhabitants  into  slavery.  These  cities 
apparently  had  been  assigned  to  Malichus.  Ant.  xiv.  11  :  2. 
These  persons  were  restored  to  liberty  by  Antony.  Ant.  xiv. 
12:5. 

i  Ant.  xiv.  11  : 3.  2  Ant.  xiv.  11  :  6. 

8  Ant.  xiv.  11  :  7  ;  12  : 1.  Josephus  states  that  Herod  recon- 
quered these  fortresses  ;  but  this  is  probably  not  strictly  correct, 
as  we  find  (Ant.  xiv.  12  :  4)  Antony  ordering  the  citizens  of  Tyre 
to  return  to  Hyrcanus  whatever  they  had  taken  during  the  dis- 
turbances under  and  following  Cassius. 


BISE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  ANTIPATEE     107 


But  after  the  defeat  of  Brutus  and  Cassius  at  Phi- 
lippi  (42  B.C.),  Antony  came  to  the  east  to  reestablish 
Kornan  control.  He  was  met  in  Bithynia  by  an  em- 
bassy from  Judea,  praying  him  to  remove  Phasaelus 
and  Herod  and  to  reinstate  Hyrcanus  in  something  more 
than  a  semblance  of  power.  Apparently,  the  case  was 
hopeless  for  the  former  allies  of  Cassius,  but  Herod 
purchased  the  good  will  of  Antony,  and  the  embassy 
was  not  even  given  a  hearing.  A  second  deputation 
asking  for  the  undoing  of  the  acts  of  Cassius  was, 
however,  more  successful,  and  Antony  restored  to 
liberty  all  those  whom  Cassius  had  sold  for  non-pay- 
ment of  taxes.1 

On  the  arrival  of  Antony  in  Antioch,  a  deputation 
of  one  hundred  prominent  Jews  met  him  with  new 
accusations  against  the  sons  of  Antipater,  especially 
Herod,  whose  insult  to  the  Sanhedrin  was  doubtless 
still  a  source  of  hatred.  But  the  remembrance  of  his 
former  friendship  with  Antipater,  together  with  the 
testimony  of  Hyrcanus  himself  to  the  good  adminis- 
tration of  Herod,  led  Antony  to  decide  in  favour  of  the 
accused,  and  to  imprison  and  later  to  execute  fifteen 
members  of  the  deputation.  He  indeed  did  more,  for 
he  appointed  Phasaelus  and  Herod  tetrarchs,  with  full 
political  power,  Hyrcanus  retaining,  therefore,  as  he 
had  under  Pompey,  simply  the  power  of  the  high- 
priesthood,  stripped  of  all  political  power.  A  subse- 
quent embassy  of  a  thousand  Jews,  which  endeavoured 
to  persuade  Antony  to  reverse  his  decision,  was  driven 
back  by  soldiers,  and  the  state  was  apparently  fixed  in 
the  hands  of  the  Idumean  family  the  subjects  and  ap- 
pointees of  Rome.2 


Antony  in 
the  east. 


Petitions  of 
the  Jews. 


New  honours 
for  Herod 
and  Phasa- 
elus. 


1  Ant.  xiv.  12  : 2-6. 


*Ant.  xiv.  13:1,2. 


CHAPTER  X 

HEROD    I   AND    THE   CHANGE    OF   DYNASTY1  (40-4  B.C.) 

THE  good  fortune  of  Herod  was,  however,  about  to 
suffer  an  eclipse.  The  favours  which  he  and  Phasaelus 
received  from  the  Romans  had  been  from  the  start 
distasteful  to  the  leading  men  of  the  Pharisees,  and 
the  treatment  accorded  their  deputations  by  Antony, 
as  well  as  the  new  taxes  laid  by  the  luxurious 
conqueror,2  had  naturally  increased  their  discontent. 
When,  therefore,  during  Antony's  stay  with  Cleopatra 
Revolt  of  in  Egypt  (40  B.C.),  Antigonus  once  more  attempted  to 
Antigonus.  get  possession  of  the  throne  by  the  aid  of  the  Par- 
thians,  whom  he  won  over  by  the  promise  of  1000 
talents  and  500  women,3  he  found  many  sympathis- 
ers in  Judea.  The  Parthian  invasion  consisted  of 
two  detachments.  One  under  Pacorus,  son  of  the 
Parthian  king,  marched  along  the  maritime  plain, 
and  the  other  under  the  satrap  Barzatharnes,  through 
the  interior.  The  first  attack  of  Antigonus  was  with 
a  small  force  of  Parthian  horsemen  and  Jews  from 
the  neighbourhood  of  Carmel  upon  the  king's  palace 
in  Jerusalem,  but  was  unsuccessful.  Thereupon  he 
waited  in  the  vicinity  of  the  city,  keeping  up  desultory 
fighting  until  Pentecost,  hoping  that  he  might  then 

1  General  References :  Schiirer,  The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  I.  416-467 ;  Ewald,  History  of 
Israel,  V.  417-449 ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  II.  84-117 ; 
Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  x.  chs.  5-8. 

a  Appian,  Civ.  5:7.  8  Ant.  xiv.  13  :  3. 

108 


HEEOD  I  109 

gather  recruits  from  those  who  came  up  to  attend  the 
feast.  In  this  he  was  successful,  and  soon  had  a  large 
force  behind  him.  Yet  he  seems  to  have  preferred 
treachery  to  fighting.  Through  his  request  the  com- 
mander of  the  Parthian  troops  (whose  relations  with 
Antigonus  were  not  known  to  Herod  and  his  brother J) 
was  allowed  to  enter  the  city  and  hold  a  conference 
with  Phasaelus  and  Hyrcanus.  Despite  the  warning  Triumph  of 
of  Herod,  he  persuaded  them  to  go  to  the  commander  Antig°nus- 
of  the  main  body  of  invaders  in  Galilee.  By  him  they 
were  treacherously  thrown  into  chains.  Shortly  after 
Phasaelus  beat  his  brains  out,  and  Hyrcanus  was  car- 
ried as  a  captive  to  Babylon,  after  his  ears  had  been 
cut  off,  that  he  might  never  again  be  high  priest.2  The 
Parthians  then  plundered  Jerusalem  and  neighbouring 
portions  of  Judea,  finally  leaving  Antigonus  to  reign 
as  king  and  high  priest  (40-37). 3  In  the  meantime 
Herod,  having  been  warned  by  Phasaelus,  fled  by  night  Flight  of 
with  a  considerable  force,  expecting  to  find  asylum 
at  Petra  with  the  Arabian  king  Malchus,  whom  he 
had  previously  aided.  When,  however,  he  started  for 
Petra,  he  was  met  by  messengers  telling  him  not  to 
proceed  farther,  as  Malchus  would  not  receive  him. 
Thereupon  he  determined  to  go  to  Egypt,  and  thence 
to  Rome.4 

Nothing  could  be  more  dramatic  than  the  events  of 
the  next  few  weeks.  Herod  arrived  at  Pelusium  and 
persuaded  the  naval  officers  to  take  him  to  Alexandria. 
Cleopatra  heard  of  his  arrival  and  endeavoured  to 
persuade  him  to  spend  the  winter  with  her  as  com- 
mander of  an  expedition  she  was  fitting  out.5  But  not 
even  she  and  the  danger  of  winter  travel  could  stop 
him.  After  a  terrible  passage  he  arrived  at  Rhodes, 
only  to  find  the  city  in  ruins  and  no  vessel  to  carry 

1  Ant.  xiv.  13  :  5.         2  Lev.  21  : 16-24.         8  Ant.  xiv.  13  : 9. 
4  Ant.  xiv.  13  : 6-10  ;  14 : 1.  5  War,  i.  14  : 2. 


110      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Herod 

appointed 

king. 


War  with 
A.ntigonus. 


him  to  Rome.  He  built1  (or  at  least  equipped2)  a 
three-decked  ship,  besides  restoring  the  city  during 
his  delay.  At  last  he  arrived  at  Brundusium,  and 
travelled  post-haste  to  Rome  and  Antony.  His  pur- 
pose in  thus  seeking  aid  at  Rome  was  to  get  the  young 
Aristobulus,  grandson  of  Hyrcanus  II  and  brother  of 
Mariamme,  appointed  king,3  doubtless  that  he  might 
repeat  the  career  of  Antipater.  But  when  he  had 
made  his  complaint  and  given  the  necessary  bribes, 
Antony  and  Octavius  preferred  to  appoint  Herod  him- 
self king,  because  of  his  evident  capacity  to  protect 
the  frontier  against  the  Parthians,4  and  persuaded  the 
Senate  to  act  accordingly.  The  next  day,  the  first  of 
his  reign,  Herod  was  feasted  by  Antony,  and  within  a 
week  after  his  arrival  in  Italy  was  sailing  back  to 
Palestine,  a  king  in  search  of  his  kingdom  (40  B.C.). 
In  the  meantime  Antigonus  had  assumed  the  high- 
priesthood  with  the  royal  title,5  and  the  Parthians  had 
been  driven  from  Syria  by  Ventidius,  the  legate  of 
Antony,6  southward  into  Judea,  whither  he  followed 
them  ostensibly  to  relieve  Joseph  (whom  his  brother 
Herod  had  left  in  charge  of  his  family  Masada)  from 
danger  from  Antigonus.  In  reality,  Ventidius  did 
little  except  mulct  Antigonus  of  large  sums.  Ac- 
cordingly, when  Herod  arrived  at  Ptolemais,  he  found 
that  the  entire  work  of  putting  down  his  rival  was  to 
be  his,  and  even  in  this  he  was  handicapped  by  the 
fact  that  Silo,  the  lieutenant  of  the  legate,  was  soon 
afterward  bribed  into  inactivity  by  Antigonus.  Yet 
he  began  the  work  of  conquering  his  country.  The 
Galileans  joined  him  in  considerable  numbers,  and 
what  with  them  and  other  Jewish  forces,  as  well  as 
Roman  and  mercenary  troops,  he  was  soon  in  a  posi- 

1  Ant.  xiv.  14  :  3.  *  Ant.  xiv.  14  : 4. 

2  War,  i.  14  :  3.  5  Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  99-103. 
8  Ant.  xiv.  14  :  5.            6  Ant.  xiv.  14  : 6. 


HEROD  I 


111 


tion  to  march  south.  Joppa  was  seized  and  garrisoned,  Hindrances 
his  friends  in  Masada  were  at  last  relieved  from  the 
peril  of  their  position,  the  fortress  of  Thresa1  was 
captured,  and  then  Herod  moved  upon  Jerusalem. 
Here  Silo  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  enter  vigor- 
ously upon  a  siege,  and,  despite  his  utmost  efforts, 
Herod  was  unable  to  prevent  the  Roman  forces  from 
going  into  winter  quarters.2  Thereupon,  in  an  excep- 
tionally severe  winter,  he  sent  his  brother  Joseph  to 
conquer  Idumea,  while  he  himself  recovered  Galilee. 
Samaria  seems  to  have  offered  no  resistance  to  his 
claims,  for  he  left  his  family  within  it.  In  Galilee 
he  found  his  chief  opponents  in  the  robbers  who 
inhabited  the  caves  at  Arbela,  near  the  Sea  of  Galilee.3 
At  first  Herod  was  unable  to  subdue  them,  but  later 
let  his  soldiers  down  in  great  boxes  and  baskets  from 
the  top  of  the  cliffs,  and  so  destroyed  them  in  their 
very  caves.  As  a  punishment  for  their  defection  Conquest  of 
he  also  laid  upon  the  cities  a  fine  of  100  talents.4  Galilee- 
A  little  later,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Parthians  by 
Ventidius,  Antony  ordered  Machaeras  with  a  consider- 
able force  to  go  to  the  aid  of  Herod.  Again,  however, 
Antigonus  succeeded  in  bribing  the  Roman  com- 
mander, but  prevented  his  entering  Jerusalem.  Herod 
none  the  less  visited  Antony,  who  received  him  with 
great  honour,5  and  after  the  surrender  of  Samosta, 
gave  him  two  legions. 

This  visit  of  Herod  to  Antony,   however,   nearly 

1  Sebbeh,  on  the  west  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.     It  belonged  to 
Idumea,  and  was  formerly  the  headquarters  of  the  party  of 
Herod,  Ant.  xiv.  13  : 9. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  15  :  3. 

3  Irbid  in  Wady  Hamman,  not  far  from  Mejdel.     The  caves 
are  still  to  be  seen.     From  Ant.  xiv.  15  :  5  it  appears  very  likely 
that  these  robbers  were  Zealots  rather  than  mere  freebooters. 

4  Ant.  xiv.  15  :  4-6.  5  Ant.  xiv.  15  :  7-9. 


112      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Momentary  cost  him  his  kingdom.  For  during  his  absence  Joseph 
allowed  himself  to  be  surprised  during  harvest  at 
Jericho,  and  together  with  a  large  portion  of  his  troops 
was  killed.  This  defeat  was  the  signal  for  wide- 
spread revolt  against  Herod.  Galilee  rose  and  drowned 
his  officers  in  the  lake,  and  a  large  part  of  Judea  also 
became  seditious.1  Herod  received  news  of  these 
misfortunes  while  in  Daphne,  near  Antioch,  and 
marched  at  once  against  Antigonus  at  the  head  of 
a  legion  and  eight  hundred  auxiliaries.  His  first 
attack  upon  Galilee  was  not  successful ;  but  upon  the 
arrival  of  a  second  legion  from  Antony  he  was  able  to 
march  upon  Jericho.  There  he  hospitably  received 
the  principal  men  of  the  country  and  beat  back  an 
attack  of  the  enemy,  and  shortly  afterward  defeated 
Pappus,  a  general  of  Antigonus.  After  this  success, 
all  Judea,  with  the  exception  of  Jerusalem,  fell  into 
his  hands,  and  as  soon  as  spring  came  he  began  the 
siege  of  the  capital,  three  years  after  he  had  been 
appointed  king.  So  assured  did  his  success  now 
seem,  that  in  the  midst  of  the  siege  he  was  married  to 
Mariamme,  the  daughter  of  Alexander,  the  son  of 
Aristobulus  II,  and  on  her  mother's  side  the  grand- 
daughter of  Hyrcanus  II  —  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
women  of  her  day,  and  to  whom  Herod  had  been  for 
several  years  betrothed.2 

Shortly  after  his  marriage,  Herod  was  reenforced 
before  Jerusalem  by  Sossius  and  the  main  army  of 
Antony.  With  eleven  legions  of  infantry,  six  thou- 
sand horse,  and  a  considerable  force  of  auxiliaries,  it 
was  only  a  question  of  time  before  Jerusalem  should 
fall  into  his  hands.  Yet  the  forces  of  Antigonus 
fought  desperately,  and  it  was  not  until  five  months 

1  Ant.  xiv.  15  : 10. 

2  Ant.  xiv.  12  : 1.     Herod  had  already  been  married  to  Doris, 
the  mother  of  Antipater. 


Herod  cap- 
tures Jeru- 
salem. 


HEROD  I  113 

after  the  beginning  of  preparations1  that  Antigonus 
yielded,  threw  himself  on  his  face  at  the  feet  of 
Sossius  and  begged  for  mercy.  The  Roman  insulted  Fate  of 
him,  called  him  "Antigone,"  and  threw  him  into  AntiS°nus- 
chains.  In  the  meantime  the  Eoman  soldiers  pillaged 
the  city,  slaughtering  all  whom  they  met,  until  Herod 
succeeded  in  saving  the  inhabitants  from  utter  destruc- 
tion by  promising  his  allies  enormous  rewards.  When 
Sossius  left,  he  carried  with  him  Antigonus  as  a  pris- 
oner, intending  to  take  him  to  Antony,  who  in  turn 
proposed  to  take  him  to  Rome  to  grace  his  triumph. 
But  Herod  feared  the  result  of  allowing  him  to  go  to 
Rome,  and  by  a  large  gift  persuaded  Antony  to  have 
him  beheaded,  according  to  Strabo  it  being  the  first 
instance  in  which  the  Romans  had  executed  such  a 
sentence  upon  a  king.2  Although  the  Asmonean 
family  still  existed  in  the  persons  of  Hyrcanus  II,  his 
daughter,  and  grandchildren,  Herod  had  now  no  rival 
claimant  for  the  throne.  The  Asmonean  dynasty  was 
at  an  end,  and  their  "  Mayors  of  the  Palace  "  were  in- 
stalled as  their  political  successors. 

It  was  no  ordinary  man  that  thus  came  to  the  Judean  Character 
throne,  at  last  forever  separated  from  the  high-priest- 
hood. For  if  Herod  is  at  times  the  "  splendid  Arab  " 
of  Renan,  the  slave  of  conspirators  in  his  women's 
quarters,  he  is  at  others  the  astute  ruler  able  to  keep  in 
check  a  headstrong  people  and  maintain  the  friendship 
of  Augustus,  a  builder  of  cities,  a  Roman  man  of  the 
world,  and  the  indispensable  guardian  of  the  Arabian 
frontier.  As  king,  he  was  one  of  a  large  number  of 
semi-dependent  "  allied  kings  " 3  (reges  socu),  who  might 

1  War,  i.  IS:  2.  2  Ant.  xv.  1  :  2. 

8  Their  numbers  may  be  inferred  from  Ant.  xix.  8:1.  See 
Kuhn,  Die  stddtische  und  bilrgerliche  Verfassung  des  romischen 
Reiches,  II.  21-33;  Marquardt,  Romische  Staatsverwaltung, 
I.  72-80,  405  f. 


114      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

not  even  use  the  royal  title  without  the  consent  of 
Allied  kings.  Rome.1  Their  powers  varied  considerably,  but  in  gen- 
eral were  only  sufficient  to  enable  them  to  be  inexpen- 
sively serviceable  to  the  Empire.  Their  rights  were 
not  always,  if  commonly,  based  upon  treaties,  and  thus 
both  within  and  without  the  Empire  their  position  was 
in  some  respects  not  unlike  that  of  the  mediaeval  vassal. 
They  were  not  always  obliged  to  pay  tribute,2  but  were 
expected  to  furnish  military  aid  whenever  it  was 
needed.  Gifts 3  were  also  expected.  Allied  kings  had 
the  right  of  coining  money  —  in  Herod's  case  restricted 
to  copper.  Military  power  was  likewise  given  them, 
but  a  too  elaborate  military  establishment  was  liable  to 
cause  suspicion.4  In  fact,  the  entire  relation  of  these 
kings  to  the  Empire  was  not  unlike  that  of  the  German 
princes  to  Napoleon  I.  If  the  "allied  king"  kept 
order  within  his  territory  and  on  the  frontier,  he  was 
shown  plenty  of  respect ;  but  if  he  proved  inefficient, 
he  was  pretty  sure  to  be  deposed,  even  if  his  territory 
was  not  made  a  part  of  a  province. 

Significance  The  reign  of  Herod  is  of  less  historical  than  bio- 
of  Herod1?11  graphical  interest.  After  he  had  once  gained  un- 
disputed possession  of  Judea,  there  could  be  little 
constitutional  change,  and  even  the  disproportionate 
importance  sometimes  given  a  country  by  a  desperate 
war  was  denied  Judea.  Yet  so  astute  a  ruler  as  he 
proved  to  be,  could  not  fail  to  leave  some  impression 
upon  the  state.  In  the  management  of  the  foreign  re- 
lations of  Judea  he  barely  missed  greatness.  Thrust 

1  Cf.  Ant.  xv.  6  :  7. 

2  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  I.  451,  is  less  guarded,  but  Appian  (Civ. 
v.  75)  expressly  says  Herod  at  first  paid  tribute. 

8  Ant.  xv.  6  :  7. 

4  As  in  the  case  of  Agrippa  I  (Ant.  xix.  7:2;  8:1)  and 
Herod  Antipas,  who,  though  a  tetrarch,  was  in  this  respect 
on  the  same  basis  as  an  allied  king,  Ant.  xviii.  7  : 2. 


HEROD  I  115 

in  between  uneasy  border  chiefs  and  the  Roman  Em- 
pire, a  king  over  a  people  that,  except  for  brief  inter- 
vals, always  hated  him,  he  was  yet  so  consummate  an 
opportunist  as  to  win  and  hold  the  favour  of  successive 
rivals.  In  fact,  the  only  enemy  whom  he  failed  either 
to  placate  or  to  worst  was  Cleopatra  of  Egypt,  espe- 
cially dangerous  because  of  her  influence  over  Antony 
and  her  determination  to  get  possession  of  the  palm 
groves  of  Jericho  as  well  as  the  surrounding  region 
of  the  Jordan  valley.1  His  reign  was  of  national  sig- 
nificance also,  not  only  because  of  the  increased  size 
of  his  kingdom,  but  also  because  of  the  rapid  increase  increase  of 
of  Hellenism  in  the  country.  Unlike  that  of  the 
days  of  Antiochus  IV,  however,  this  later  Hellenism 
seems  to  have  affected  Jewish  religious  life  but  little 
within  Palestine  itself.  Heathen  cities  grew  more 
prosperous  and  the  heathen  population  of  the  land  in- 
creased. Jerusalem  itself  had  its  theatre,  amphi- 

1  Ant.  xv.  4:1,  2 ;  War,  iv.  8:2;  Strabo,  Geography,  xvi. 
2  : 41,  speak  of  the  balsam  and  palm  groves  of  this  region.  The 
region  is  still  luxuriant,  but  lacks  water.  This  lack  was  met  in 
the  Roman  epoch  by  reservoirs  and  aqueducts,  the  remains  of 
which  are  still  to  be  seen.  One  aqueduct,  for  instance,  runs 
near  the  road  between  Jerusalem  and  Jericho,  and  the  remains 
of  at  least  two  are  to  be  seen  in  Wady  Kelt.  A  plan  of  the 
aqueducts  near  Jericho  is  given  in  Survey  of  West  Pal.  Me- 
moirs, III.  222. 

The  personal  relations  of  Herod  with  Cleopatra  form  a  curi- 
ous episode  in  the  career  of  both.  She  had  tried  unsuccessfully 
to  persuade  him  to  remain  with  her  in  some  military  capacity 
while  he  was  on  his  first  journey  to  Rome  {War,  i.  14  : 2),  and 
during  the  absence  of  Antony  she  later  endeavoured  to  draw  him 
into  a  liaison.  Herod  is  said  at  that  time  to  have  consulted 
with  his  friends  as  to  the  advisability  of  his  killing  her.  It  was 
at  her  suggestion  that  Antony  sent  Herod  against  the  king  of 
Arabia,  and  it  was  her  general  who  defeated  him  at  Cana  in 
Syria,  Ant.  xv.  5:1.  After  the  defeat  of  Antony,  Herod  ad- 
vised him  to  kill  Cleopatra  and  compromise  with  Octavius,  Ant. 
XV.  6  : 6. 


116      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  consoli- 
dation of 
Pharisaism. 


Shammai 
and  Hillel. 


theatre,  and  games.  The  more  pious  Jews  held  them- 
selves aloof  from  these  surroundings,  but  none  the 
less  the  new  factors  were  to  prove  of  considerable  im- 
portance in  political  affairs,  and  if  we  may  judge  by 
the  events  of  66  A.D.  the  increased  hatred  of  the  Gen- 
tile was  accompanied  by  an  equally  strong  hatred  of 
the  Jew. 

But  doubtless  most  important  of  all  the  national 
results  of  Herod's  reign  was  the  consolidation  of 
Pharisaism.  At  the  outset,  the  Pharisees  seeing  in 
him  the  enemy  of  Antigonus  and  Sadducaism  had 
favoured  Herod,  and  their  two  leaders,  Pollio  —  pos- 
sibly the  celebrated  Abtalion — and  his  pupil,  She- 
maia,1  had  advised  Jerusalem  to  open  its  gates  to 
him.2  Herod's  wholesale  massacre  of  the  Sadducean 
aristocracy3  and  his  reorganisation  of  the  Sanhedrin 
under  Pharisaic  influence,  confirm  this  opinion.  It 
was  under  Herod,  also,  that  the  two  best-known  Jew- 
ish rabbis  taught, —  Shammai  and  Hillel.  Of  these 
two  really  great  men,  Shammai  is  represented  as  the 
sterner  and  more  uncompromising ;  Hillel  the  gentler 
and  more  liberal.4  Yet  this  difference  was  rather  with 
the  refinements  of  the  Law.  As  regards  its  ethical  con- 
tent they  were  at  one.  Shammai  bade  his  disciples 
"make  the  study  of  the  Law  a  decided  occupation, 
promise  little  and  do  much,  and  receive  every  one  with 
kindness ; "  while  no  Jewish  teacher  has  left  so  many 
profound  ethical  sayings  as  Hillel.  "  Do  not  to  others 
what  thou  wouldst  not  have  done  to  thyself.  This  is 
the  principal  commandment ;  all  others  are  the  devel- 
opment of  that  one."  "  He  who  wishes  to  raise  his 
name,  lowers  it ;  he  who  does  not  seek  the  Law,  does 

1  Derenbourg,  Essai,  etc.,  149,  150. 

2  Ant.  xv.  1  : 1.    See  Stade,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  IL 
476. 

8  Ant.  xv.  1:2.  *  See  Delitzsch,  Hillel  and  Jesus. 


HEROD  I 


117 


not  deserve  to  live.  He  who  does  not  progress  in 
learning  retrogrades  ;  he  who  uses  the  crown  of  the 
Law  for  his  own  ends,  perishes  "  —  these  are  but  two 
of  his  sayings.  Under  Hillel,  also,  the  confused  exe- 
getical  method  of  the  earlier  scribes  was  systematised 
and  reduced  to  seven  rules  ;  l  while  his  practical  sagacity 
appeared  when,  as  president  of  the  Sanhedrin,  he  pro- 
cured the  passage  of  a  law  regulating  the  cancellation 
of  debts  in  the  sabbatical  year,  which  was  proving  in- 
jurious to  business  enterprise. 

The  reign  of  Herod  not  only  saw  both  Pharisees  Herod  con- 
and  Sadducees  withdraw  from  political  life  ;  it  saw  high-priest 


the  latter  utterly  stripped  of  political  significance. 
Obscure  men  from  Babylon  and  Alexandria  were  ele- 
vated to  the  high-priesthood,  and  the  office  itself  came 
wholly  within  the  control  of  the  new  king.  At  the 
very  beginning  of  his  reign,  Herod  broke  the  power 
of  the  old  Sadducean  aristocracy  by  executing  forty- 
five  of  its  most  wealthy  members  and  confiscating 
their  property,2  and  as  a  result  throughout  his  life  he 
was  free  from  any  danger  from  that  quarter. 

But  beyond  these  limits  the  reign  of  Herod  has 
small  historical  significance,  and  its  interest  lies  in 
those  personal  affairs  so  minutely  copied  by  Josephus 
from  the  king's  historiographer,  Nicholas  of  Damascus. 

Safe  from  any  serious  opposition  from  the  nation, 
Herod  was  rich  in  rivals  in  the  members  of  the  Asmo- 
nean  house,  Hyrcanus  II,  his  daughter  Alexandra,  and 
her  children  Aristobulus  and  Mariamme,  his  own  wife. 
The  first  attitude  of  Herod  toward  these  members  of  Attitude 
his  family  was  altogether  friendly.     He  had  always  to^rTthe 
been  on  good  terms  with  the  old  Hyrcanus,  and  at  the  Asmoneans 
beginning  of  his  reign  induced  him  to  return  from 
Babylon.     On  his   arrival   in  Jerusalem,   Herod  re- 

1  Given  in  Mielziner,  Introduction  to  the  Talmud,  123,  126  sq. 

2  Ant.  xv.  1  :  2  ;   War,  L  18  :  4. 


118      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Hy  rearms 

and 

Alexandra. 


Murder  of 
Aristobulus. 


ceived  him  with  distinction,  gave  him  the  most  honour- 
able seat  at  banquets,  called  him  father,  and  in  every 
way  possible  endeavoured  to  replace  him  in  his  old 
position.1  High  priest,  Hyrcanus  could  not  be  because 
of  the  loss  of  his  ears,  and  Herod  accordingly  appointed 
his  friend  Ananel,  an  obscure  Jew  from  Babylon,  to  the 
office.2  Herod's  mother-in-law,  Alexandra,  however,  a 
scheming,  selfish  woman,  took  it  ill  that  her  son  Aris- 
tobulus should  not  have  been  chosen  to  succeed  his 
grandfather  and  uncle,  and  immediately  began  to  in- 
trigue with  Cleopatra  in  hopes  of  Antony's  support. 
The  means  she  chose  to  bring  her  ends  to  pass  were 
worthy  of  the  age,  the  woman,  and  the  man,3  but 
proved  ineffectual.  Herod,  nevertheless,  judged  it 
politic  to  reinstate  the  Asmonean  family  in  the  high- 
priesthood,  and  after  deposing  Ananel,  appointed 
Aristobulus.4 

But  although  apparently  reconciled,  Herod  and 
Alexandra  were  really  struggling  for  the  control  of 
the  state.  Herod's  suspicions,  aroused  by  a  knowledge 
of  this  fact,  were  deepened  by  Alexandra's  attempt  to 
escape  with  Aristobulus  to  Cleopatra,  his  implacable 
enemy,  and  after  he  saw  the  enthusiasm  aroused  by  the 
bearing  and  beauty  of  Aristobulus  as  he  officiated  at 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  he  judged  it  no  longer  safe 
to  allow  the  boy  to  live.  Shortly  after  the  feast, 
Aristobulus  was  drowned,  apparently  accidentally, 
while  he  was  bathing  in  one  of  the  fish  ponds  of  his 
mother's  palace  at  Jericho,5  and  Ananel  once  more  be- 

1  Ant.  xv.  2  : 3,  4.     The  explanation  of  this  conduct  by  Jo- 
sephus  is  that  of  treachery  on  Herod's  part.     Why,  then,  did 
he  wait  seven  years  before  killing  him  ? 

2  Ant.  xv.  2  :  4;  3  : 1.  3  Ant.  xv.  2  :  5,  6. 

4  According  to  Josephus,  this  was  the  third  time  that  a  high 
priest  had  been  deposed,  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  Aristobu- 
lus II  being  the  other  two  offenders.     Ant.  xv.  3:1. 

5  Ant.  xv.  3  :  3. 


HEROD  I  119 

came  high  priest.  Alexandra  never  doubted  Herod's 
complicity  in  her  son's  death,  and  succeeded  in  having 
the  king  brought  to  trial  before  Antony,  who  just  then 
came  to  Laodicea  on  the  Syrian  coast.  Herod  went 
with  trepidation,  leaving  his  uncle,  Joseph,  in  charge 
of  the  state  and  the  royal  household,  with  orders  to 
kill  Mariamme  in  case  he  should  not  return.  This 
genuinely  barbarian  foresight  was  to  bring  Herod  even 
more  deeply  into  trouble  with  his  wife  and  mother-in- 
law.  On  his  return,  his  sister  Salome,  who  was  madly 
jealous  of  the  Asinonean  women,  accused  Mariamme 
of  unfaithfulness.  His  suspicion  was  strengthened 
by  Mariamme's  reference  to  his  secret  orders  to  Joseph, 
and  in  a  rage  of  jealousy  he  executed  Joseph,  put 
Alexandra  under  guard,  and  all  but  killed  Mariamme.1 

During  the  latter  part  of  the  supremacy  of  Antony 
and  Cleopatra,  Herod  was  forced  to  pay  rental,  not 
only  for  Jericho,  but  also  for  Arabia,  a  fact  that 
plunged  him  at  one  time  into  the  greatest  danger. 
The  Arabian  king  refused  to  pay  the  proper  tribute, 
and  Herod  undertook  to  enforce  his  demands,  but  Herod's  war 
was  utterly  defeated,  and  for  some  time  was  unable  wlthArabia- 
to  gather  any  considerable  army  or  carry  on  anything 
beyond  guerilla  war.  It  was  not  for  several  months, 
indeed  until  after  the  battle  of  Actium,  that  he  was 
able  to  bring  the  Arabians  again  into  subjection.2 

The  victory  of  Octavius  at  Actium  might  easily 
have  ended  Herod's  career.  He  had  been  the  friend 
of  Antony,  and  indeed  had  been  prevented  from  send- 
ing him  troops  only  because  Cleopatra  had  judged  it 
more  prudent  to  send  him  against  the  king  of  Arabia, 

1  Ant.  xv.  3  :  5-9. 

2  The  statement  of  Ant.  xv.  5  :  5,  that  the  Arabians,  "  made 
him  ruler  of  their  nation,"  can  hardly  be  taken  except  in  this 
general  sense.    There  is  no  evidence  that  Herod  was  actually 
the  king  of  Arabia. 


120      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Herod  that  the  two  kings  might  mutually  weaken  one  another.1 

friends  with  But  with  a  daring  amounting  to  genius,  Herod  rushed 
Oetavius.  to  the  help  of  Didius,  the  governor  of  Syria,  in  his 
attack  upon  a  band  of  Antony's  gladiators ; 2  had  the 
aged  Hyrcanus  II  executed  on  an  highly  improbable 
charge  of  conspiracy;3  committed  Mariamme  to  the 
care  of  one  Sohemus,  with  the  same  command  as  that 
he  had  previously  given  Joseph ;  and  went  to  meet  the 
new  master  of  the  republic.4  When  brought  into  the 
presence  of  Oetavius,  Herod  laid  aside  nothing  of 
royal  state  except  his  diadem,  told  of  his  services  to 
Antony,  boasted  that  he  had  not  deserted  him,  and 
finally  left  it  to  Oetavius  to  say  whether  or  not  he 

1  Ant.  xv.  5:1.  2  Ant.  xv.  6  :  7. 

3  Josephus  gives  two  versions  of  this  matter.     One,  drawn 
from  the  Commentaries  of  Herod,  in  which,  under  the  influence 
of  Alexandra,  Hyrcanus  compromises  himself  with  Malchus, 
governor  of  Arabia,  is  evidently  intended  to  justify  his  execu- 
tion ;  and  the  other  based  upon  "other  historians,"  in  which 
the  charge  is  clearly  seen  to  be  absurd.     When  one  recalls 
Herod's  critical  position,  there  was  actual  risk  in  leaving  the 
weak  old  man  in  the  vicinity  of  Alexandra,  and  his  death, 
unlikely  under  other  circumstances,  became  then  an  apparent 
necessity. 

4  It  is  impossible  not  to  suspect  that  these  two  stories  as  to 
killing  Mariamme  are  one  and  the  same.     The  omission  of  one 
story  in  JFar,  i.  22  : 4,  5,  the  inaccuracy  with  which  Josephus 
combines  sources  dealing  with  the  same  events,  as  well  as  the 
parallelism  of  facts  and  attendant  circumstances,  strengthen 
the  suspicion.    If  one  be  omitted,  it  must  be  the  earlier,  since 
five  children  (TFar,  i.  22  : 2)  could  hardly  have  been  born  to 
Mariamme  by  34  B.C.,  at  which  time  Joseph  and  she  are  said 
to  have  been  killed.    The  other  story  may  have  arisen  from  a 
confusion  of  his  uncle  Joseph  with  Herod's  other  brother,  Phe- 
roras  (to  whom  he  committed  his  affairs),  and  his  treasurer 
Joseph,  who,  as  well  as  Sohemus,  was  in  charge  of  the  fortress 
in  which  was  Mariamme.     On  the  other  hand,  it  is  hard  on 
this  hypothesis  to  explain  the  reference  to  the  execution  of 
Joseph,  Ant.  xv.  7  :  9. 


HEROD  I  121 

should  be  allowed  to  continue  as  a  servant  of  Rome. 
Octavius  saw  the  value  of  the  man,  reestablished 
him  as  king,  and  after  the  two  had  visited  Egypt 
together,  gave  him  back  Jericho,  and  also  added  to 
his  territories  the  cities  of  Gadara,  Hippos,  Samaria., 
Gaza,  Anthedon,  Joppa,  and  Strato's  Tower.1 

But  again  Herod  was  to  be  tormented  by  quarrels 
among  the  women  of  his  family.  Salome  and  Cypros, 
stung  by  the  contempt  of  Mariamme,  waited  only  an 
opportunity  to  cause  her  downfall.  The  moment  came 
when,  after  a  year  of  stormy  life,  Herod  was  finally 
driven  furious  by  his  wife's  contempt  and  reproaches. 
Then  again  did  Salome  accuse  her  of  infidelity,  and 
in  a  paroxysm  of  rage  and  jealousy  Herod  ordered  Execution  of 
(28  B.C.)  Mariamme  to  execution.  Alexandra,  in  an  Mariamme 
attempt  to  preserve  herself,  flooded  her  daughter  with 
taunts  and  insults,  but  the  proud  and  beautiful  woman 
met  her  death  without  even  a  change  of  colour  —  a 
worthy  descendant  of  her  house.2 

No  sooner  was  his  wife  dead  than  Herod  became 
insane  with  grief.  He  gave  up  the  administration 
of  the  state,  commanded  his  servants  to  act  as  if 
Mariamme  were  still  alive,  plunged  into  all  sorts  of 
excesses,  and,  if  the  rabbinical  legend  is  to  be  believed, 
kept  Mariamme's  body  by  him,  preserved  in  honey.3 
So  critical  did  his  condition  become  that,  in  anticipa- 
tion of  his  death,  Alexandra  undertook  to  seize  the 
kingdom  for  herself  and  her  grandsons  ;  but  her  efforts 
were  reported  to  Herod,  and  he  promptly  had  her 
executed  (28  B.C.).  Thereupon  he  seems  to  have  par-  and  Alex- 
tially  recovered  ;  but  throughout  his  life  he  was  subject  andra> 
to  attacks  of  melancholy  during  which  he  was  blood- 
thirsty and  tyrannical.4  Three  years  later,  again  at 
the  instigation  of  Salome,  who  had  married  Costobar, 


1  Ant.  xv.  7  :  3  ;   War,  i.  20  :  3.  2  Ant,  xv.  7  .  4. 

8  Derenbourg,  Histoire,  etc.,  151.          *  Ant.  xv.  7  :  3. 


122      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

he  sought  out  and  executed  the  sons  of  Babas,  the  last 
representatives  of  the  Asmonean  house,1  together  with 
Costobar  himself,  who  had  offered  them  an  asylum  for 
twelve  years.  After  this  he  was  without  rivals,  ex- 
cept those  of  his  own  family. 

The  succeeding  period  of  twenty  years  furnishes 
little  to  relate  except  a  record  of  lavish  building,  the 
story  of  new  domestic  tragedies  and  growing  Phari- 
saism. Its  earlier  and  happier,  portion  was  taken  up 
with  Herod's  efforts  to  imitate  Augustus  as  a  builder. 
He  had  early  rebuilt  the  citadel  of  the  temple,  renaming 
it,  in  honour  of  his  friend  Antony,  Antonia,2  and  later  he 
added  a  theatre  and  an  amphitheatre  as  well  as  impreg- 
nable towers  at  Jerusalem.3  He  celebrated  games  every 
fourth  year  in  honour  of  Augustus,  and  hung  up  various 
inscriptions  and  trophies  in  his  honour.4  This  Eoman 
zeal  of  their  king,  together  with  his  constant  innova- 
tions, aroused  the  more  fanatical  Jews  to  desperation, 
and  a  conspiracy  was  formed  to  kill  Herod.  It  was 
betrayed,  and  its  members  were  executed.  It  showed 
Herod,  however,  the  danger  that  lay  in  his  position, 
and  he  immediately  began  to  fortify  and  garrison 
various  parts  of  the  country  in  readiness  for  a  revolt. 
Sebaste,  Caesarea,  Gaba  in  Galilee,  and  Heshbon  in 
Perea  were  among  the  military  posts  he  thus  estab- 
lished,5 while  he  also  built  castles  in  other  parts  of 
the  country,  like  Herodium  southeast  of  Bethlehem,6 
(Frank  Mountain),  and  Herodium  in  Arabia,  or  re- 

1  Ant.  xv.  7  : 10.  2  Ant.  xv.  8  :  5. 

8  Schick  has  discovered  a  theatre  south  of  Jerusalem,  but  not 
an  amphitheatre.  See  P.  E.  F.  Quarterly  Statement,  1887, 161- 
166. 

4  When  these  last  gave  offence  to  the  Jews,  because  they 
were  images,  he  turned  their  anger  into  laughter  by  showing 
the  pieces  of  wood  on  which  the  pieces  of  armour  were  hung. 
Ant.  xv.  8  : 1,  2. 

6  Ant.  xv.  8:5.  6  Ant.  xv.  9  : 4. 


HEEOD  I  123 

built  Asmonean  strongholds  that  had  been  dismantled, 
like  Alexandrium,  Machaerus,  Masada,  and  Hyrcania. 
In  the  case  of  Sebaste l  and  Caesarea,  he  built  really 
magnificent  cities,  the  ruins  of  the  former  (Sebustieh) 
even  to-day  being  considerable.  Caesarea,  in  building  Cities, 
which  twelve  years 2  were  spent,  became  the  most  im- 
portant seaport  south  of  Ptolemais,  and  boasted  huge 
moles,  quays,  towers,  sewers,  temples,  colonnades, 
palaces,  as  well  as  an  amphitheatre,  a  theatre,  and  a 
hippodrome.  Like  Sebaste  it  was  named  in  honour 
of  Augustus,  whose  temple  high  above  the  city  com- 
manded the  entire  region.3  Nor  did  his  passion  for 
building  stop  with  military  necessities.  In  the  Jordan 
valley  he  built  the  cities  of  Antipatris  and  Phasaelis, 
named  in  honour  of  his  father  and  unfortunate 
brother,4  and  a  citadel  at  Jericho,  which  was  named 
for  his  mother,  Cypros.  In  the  maritime  plain  he  re- 
built Anthedon  and  named  it  Agrippaeum,  in  honour 
of  his  friend  Agrippa,5  while  he  also  erected  temples, 
colonnades,  or  other  public  buildings  in  most  cities  he 
visited,  but  especially  in  Antioch,  Rhodes,  Nicopolis, 
Chios,6  Ascalon,  Tyre,  Sidon,  Banias,  Byblus,  Berytus, 
Tripolis,  Ptolemais,  Damascus,  Athens,  and  Sparta. 

Herod's  regard  for  heathen  customs,   displayed  in  Herod's 
much  of  this  building,  is  also  evidenced  by  the  games  Hellemsm« 
he  established  at  Caesarea  and  Jerusalem,  by  his  gifts 
toward  maintaining  the  Olympic  games,7  and  by  his 
choice  of  Greeks  to  administer  his  affairs  and  to  act 
as  tutors   for  his   sons.     He   is  even   said  to  have 
studied  Greek  philosophy  under  Nicholas  of  Damas- 
cus, his  litterateur  and  orator.8    At  the  same  time  he 

1  Ant.  xvi.  5:1.  8  Ant.  xv.  9  : 6. 

2  Ant.  xv.  8:5.  4  War,  i.  21  :  9  ;  Ant.  xvi.  5  :  2. 

s  War,  i.  21  :  8.  6  ^nt.  xvi.  2:2.  *  Ant.  xvi.  5  : 3. 

0  ScMrer,  Div.  1. 1.  442  n.,  quotes  a  passage  from  Nicholas 
to  this  effect. 


124      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Internal 
affairs. 


Regard  for 
the  Jews. 


followed  the  customs  of  Kome  by  building  himself  a 
strongly  fortified  palace  in  the  Upper  City  at  Jerusa- 
lem,1 in  laying  out  parks,  and  breeding  pigeons.2 

At  the  same  time  that  he  was  thus  winning  popularity 
in  the  Greek  world,  Herod  did  not  cease  to  be  a  king  of 
the  Jews.  His  internal  improvements  were  worthy  of 
the  man  he  copied.  The  water  supply  of  Jerusalem 
was  improved,  the  robber  bands  of  Trachonitis  were  con- 
trolled by  three  thousand  Idumean  colonists,3  the  mis- 
eries of  famine  were  alleviated  by  public  works  em- 
ploying fifty  thousand  men,  and  aid  was  given  to  other 
sufferers  until  even  the  royal  plate  was  sold.4  Twice 
did  he  reduce  the  taxes,  once  in  20  B.C.  by  a  third,  and 
once  in  14  B.C.  by  a  fourth.  In  addition,  the  country 
was  kept  in  peace,  robbers  were  everywhere  attacked, 
the  frontier  was  rigorously  guarded.  So  successful 
was  he  in  his  administration  that  Augustus  gave  him 
successively  Trachonitis,  Auranitis,  Batanea,  and  the 
tetrarchy  of  Zenodorus,  which  included  Banias,  while 
his  brother  Pheroras  was  appointed  tetrarch  of  Perea,5 
and  the  procurator  of  Syria  was  ordered  to  consult 
with  the  king  in  all  important  matters. 

Such  good  administration  won  him  also  the  favour 
of  the  people.  If  they  murmured  somewhat  at 
his  lavish  devotion  to  heathen  life,  they  appreciated 
the  regard  for  their  prejudices  concerning  graven 
images  shown  in  his  coins  and  buildings,  as  well  as 
the  political  necessity  under  which  he  was  placed.6 
Even  more  did  they  appreciate  the  substantial  aid 
that  such  friendship  enabled  Herod  to  gain  for  the 
Jews,  not  only  in  Judea  but  in  the  Dispersion.7  The 
Pharisees  themselves  might  praise  a  ruler  who  re- 
spected their  opinions,  paused  to  prove  the  absence 


1  Ant.  xv.  9  :  4. 
8  TFar,  v.  4  : 4. 


3  Ant.  xvi.  9  : 2. 
*  Ant.  xv.  9  :  2. 
7  Ant.  xvi.  2  : 3. 


5  Ant.  xv.  10  :  3, 

6  Ant.  xv.  9  :  5. 


HEROD  I  125 

of  impiety  in  trophies,  demanded  circumcision  of  a 
suitor  for  his  sister's  hand,1  scrupulously  observed  the 
sanctity  of  the  temple  and  its  courts,2  and  whose 
accusers  before  Agrippa  and  Augustus  were  the  Ara- 
bians and  the  heathen  citizens  of  Gadara.  Even  his 
enemies  could  plead  little  against  him  beyond  severity 
in  the  interests  of  order,3  and  the  most  fanatical  must 
have  honoured  a  ruler  who  excused  many  of  their 
scribes  from  taking  an  oath  of  allegiance,4  and  who 
especially  honoured  the  Essenes.  It  is  true,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  he  had  greatly  weakened  the  Sanhe- 
drin  by  the  massacre  of  its  Sadducean  members  with 
which  he  began  his  reign,  but  there  is  no  good  reason 
for  doubting  that  it  continued  both  as  a  sort  of  Phari- 
saic academy  whose  decisions  were  final  in  matters  of 
religion,  and  as  a  court  before  whom  Herod  himself 
could  cite  the  unfortunate  Hyrcanus  II.5  Even  if  he 
removed  and  appointed  the  high  priests  arbitrarily, 
his  action  was  offset  by  the  magnificent  temple  which  The  new 
in  20  B.C.  he  began  to  erect  in  place  of  the  one  as- 
oribed  to  Zerubbabel,  as  well  as  by  the  regard  for  the 
priests  as  a  class  he  exhibited  during  the  eighteen 
months  of  its  building,6  and  his  own  observance  of  the 
building's  sanctity. 

But  whatever  popularity  such  facts  as  these  imply,  Tragedy  of 
was  lost  during  the  last  years  of  Herod's  life.     Again  ye^rs.  S 
family  troubles  aroused  the  worst  side  of  his  nature, 
and  his  family  and  the  Pharisees  alike  suffered.     As 
he  grew  older,  he  grew  less  tolerant  of  his  people's 
prejudices.     Understand  them  he  most  certainly  did ; 
but  either  confidence  in  his  own  power,  or  some  insan- 
ity resulting    from    his    domestic   tragedy,   led   him 
repeatedly  to  irritate  and  enrage  them  in  a  way  alto- 

1  Ant.  xvi.  7:6.  *  Ant.  xv.  10  :  4,  5. 

2  Ant.  xv.  11  :  5.  6  Ant.  xv.  6  :  2. 

8  Ant.  xv.  10  :  3.  6  Ant.  xv.  11 :  2,  5,  6. 


126      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

gether  impossible  for  him  during  his  better  years.  It 
is  in  these  later  years  that  one  must  seek  the  obscure 
beginnings  of  that  Zealot  party  which  was  later  to 
prove  so  terrible  an  agent  of  revolt.  Unlike  the 
Essenes,  the  Zealots  seem  to  have  sprung  directly  from 
the  Pharisees,  from  whom  they  came  to  differ  largely 
in  this  one  respect :  despairing  of  any  Messiah,  and 
impatient  for  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  they 
tired  of  faith  and  patience  and  looked  to  revolution. 
Patriotism  with  them  was  synonymous  with  action. 
They  would  "  see  the  judgments  and  all  the  curses  of 
their  enemies." l  It  is  their  spirit  that  appeared  in  the 
group  of  three  thousand  Pharisees  who  refused  to  take 
the  oath  of  allegiance  to  Herod  and  the  emperor,2  and 
it  is  easy  to  see  members  of  the  party  also  in  the  mob 
of  fanatics  under  the  two  rabbis,  Judas  and  Mattathias, 
who  tore  down  the  eagle  Herod  had  carved  over  the 
entrance  to  the  temple.3 

But  apart  from  his  growing  severity  toward  his 
people,  Herod's  last  years  were  full  of  misery.  The 
absence  of  any  clear  law  governing  succession  to  the 
throne,  and  the  consequent  opportunity  for  plots  and 
counter-plots  in  favour  of  some  one  of  the  king's 
numerous  sons,4  doubtless  explain  much  of  the  tragedy 
that  marked  these  years,  but  along  with  them  must  be 
placed  the  character  of  Herod  himself.  The  mad  de- 
termination not  to  surrender  his  throne  before  his 
death ;  the  fierce  suspicion  that,  first  aroused  by  treach- 
ery among  them  he  loved  best,  embraced  an  ever-in- 
creasing number  of  those  nearest  him ;  the  tyrannical 

1  See  Book  of  Jubilees  and  the  Assumption  of  Moses,  which 
though  probably  not  written  at  this  time  represent  the  Zealot 
spirit. 

2  Ant.  xvii.  2:4.  8  Ant.  xvii.  6  ;  2-4. 

4  Antipater,  Aristobulus,  Alexander,  Archelaus,  Herod  (of 
Rome),  Herod  Antipas,  Herod  Philip. 


HEROD  I  127 

control  of  his  people;  all  sprang  from  a  character  as 
unrestrained  in  its  passions  as  in  its  energies. 

His  difficulties  with  his  family  were  of  long  stand-  Troubles 
ing,  but  became  acute  when  in  order  to  curb  the  arro-  ^er  and" 
gance  of  Alexander  and  Aristobulus,  his  sons  by  Mari-  Aristobulus 
amme,    he    caused    his   eldest   son  Antipater  to   be 
brought  from  Galilee,  where  he  had  been  living  in  semi- 
banishment.1     The   two  young  men,   proud  of  their 
Asmonean  descent,  bore  their  disgrace  ill,  and  soon 
became  indiscreet,  even  if  not  disloyal  in  speech.     The 
situation  was  complicated  by  the  enmities  and  jealous- 
ies of  the  various  women  in  the  royal  household  — 
Salome,  the  king's  sister,  G-laphyra,  the  wife  of  Alex- 
ander, Bernice,  the  daughter  of  Salome,  the  wife  of 
Aristobulus,  and  the  various  wives  of  Herod  himself,2 
while  through  it  all  ran  the  poisonous  influence  of  An- 
tipater,3 set  upon  the  death  of  the  sons  of  Mariamme. 

The  storm  broke  first  in  B.C.  12,  and  Herod  then 
took  Aristobulus  and  Alexander  to  Rome,  to  accuse 
them  before  the  emperor,  but  Augustus  had  brought 
about  a  reconciliation.  Two  years  later,  certain  eu- 
nuchs, under  torture,  confessed  that  Alexander  had 
made  contemptuous  remarks  about  Herod,4  and  even 
was  plotting  with  his  brother  Aristobulus  against  him. 
Herod  at  once  arrested  Alexander,  tortured  and  killed 
his  friends,  and,  as  Alexander,  doubtless  in  hopes  of 
Roman  interference,  endeavoured  to  incite  him  to 
greater  madness,  became  almost  insane  with  fear  and 
suspicion.  Yet  just  when  affairs  were  most  desperate, 
the  father-in-law  of  Alexander,  Archelaus  of  Cappa- 
docia,  could  bring  about  a  reconciliation  between  the 
father  and  son  by  feigning  to  malign  Alexander. 
Herod's  fatherly  instincts  were  yet  too  strong  to  en- 
dure such  an  attack  upon  the  child  of  Mariamme,  and 

1  Ant.  xvi.  3:3.  «  Ant.  xvi.  8  :  4. 

2  Ant.  xvi.  7  :  2-5.  *  Ant.  xvi.  8  : 1-5. 


128      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

he  restored  Alexander  to  favour,  showering  Archelaus 
with  all  sorts  of  presents ! l    For  a  few  months  the 
family  lived  in  peace.     Herod  was  engaged  in  punish- 
ing a  wily  Arab  who  had  defaulted  payment  on  some 
bond,  and,  thanks  to  this  rascal's  monetary  influence 
Herod  in        at  the  imperial  court,  found  himself  in  disfavour  with 
wkhTugus-   Augustus.     So  far  did  the  misunderstanding  go  that 
tus.  the  emperor  wrote  Herod  that  "  whereas  of  old  he  had 

treated  Herod  as  his  friend,  he  should  now  treat  him 
as  his  subject."2  But  even  while  affairs  were  in  this 
condition  the  brothers  were  again  accused  of  treason, 
and  when,  through  the  efforts  of  Nicholas  of  Damas- 
cus, Herod  was  restored  to  favour,  Augustus  gave  him 
full  power  to  deal  with  his  sons  as  he  saw  fit.  A  few 
weeks  later  they  were  tried  and  condemned  before 
Execution  of  a  court  at  Berytus  (Beirut)  and  (B.C.  7)  strangled  at 
brothers.  Sebaste.3  Thereupon  Antipater,  in  complete  control 
of  his  father,  went  to  Rome  to  await  the  old  king's 
death. 

But  the  fearful  drama  was  not  yet  complete.    Herod 

turned  fiercely  upon  the  Pharisees,  and  was  engaging 

in  something  like   persecution,  when,  thanks  to  the 

revelations  of  Salome,  he  suddenly  discovered  the  true 

character  of  Antipater.    He  ordered  him  back  to  Judea, 

had  him  tried,  condemned,  and  imprisoned.     Later, 

Execution  of  again  with  the  consent  of  Augustus,  he  had  the  wretch 

amfdeath      executed.     Ten  days  later  he  himself  died,4  dividing 

of  Herod. 

1  Ant.  xvi.  8  :  6. 

2  Ant.  xvi.  9 : 3.    Ramsay,  Was  Christ  Born  in  Bethlehem  ? 
makes  this  fact  the  basis  of  an  ingenious  argument  to  prove 
that  at  this  time  Augustus  instituted  a  house  enrolment  in  Judea 
after  the  Roman  fashion.     It  is  difficult  to  find  so  much  in  the 
very  general  statement  of  Josephus,  especially  in  the  light  of  the 
expressions  used  in  describing  the  reconciliation  of  Augustus 
and  Herod  (Ant.  xvi.  10  :  9). 

8  Ant.  xvi.  11  :  2-7  ;   War,  i.  27  :  2-6. 

*  Ant.  xvii.  4  :  1-2  ;  5  :  1-8  ;  7  : 1 ;  8  :  1-3. 


HEROD  I  129 

his  kingdom  among  three  of  his  sons :  Archelaus,  to 
whom  he  gave  Judea,  with  the  title  of  king ;  Herod 
Antipas,  to  whom  he  gave  Galilee  and  Perea,  with 
the  title  of  tetrarch ;  and  Philip,  to  whom  he  gave  the 
northeastern  districts,  also  with  the  title  of  tetrarch. 
He  had  reigned  thirty-seven  years.1 

1  Herod's  wills  were  numerous.  A  rex  socius  could  not 
bequeath  his  kingdom  without  the  consent  of  Home.  It  had 
been,  therefore,  a  mark  of  favour  that,  when  Herod  for  the  sec- 
ond time  visited  Rome  for  the  purpose  of  accusing  Alexander 
and  Aristobulus,  Augustus,  after  bringing  about  a  recon- 
ciliation, had  given  him  the  right  to  dispose  of  his  kingdom  as 
he  saw  fit  (Ant.  xvi.  4:5).  It  would  seem  that  at  that  time 
Herod  thought  of  abdicating,  but  was  prevented  by  Augustus. 
Accordingly,  on  his  arrival  in  Jerusalem,  he  announced  to  the 
people  assembled  in  the  temple  that  his  sons  should  succeed 
him  in  the  order  of  Antipater,  Alexander,  and  Aristobulus. 
His  first  formal  will  ( Ant.  xvii.  3:2)  provided  that  Herod,  the 
son  of  the  high  priest's  daughter,  should  succeed  him.  Subse- 
quently, after  he  had  discovered  the  "prodigious  wickedness" 
of  Antipater,  he  made  another  will,  bequeathing  his  kingdom  to 
Herod  Antipas  (Ant.  xvii.  6:1).  This  again  was  revoked  by 
his  last  will  (Ant.  xvii.  8:1),  the  provisions  of  which  are 
given  above. 


CHAPTER  XI 

ARCHELAUS1    (4  B.C.-6  A.D.) 

Disturb-  BEFORE  Herod's  will  could  serve  as  a  basis  for  the 

Herod's*^     new  administrations  of  his  sons  it  had  to  be  reviewed 
death.  and  confirmed  by  Augustus.     As  a  result,  Judea  was 

left  for  months  without  any  settled  government,  ex- 
posed to  every  form  of  disorder.  At  once  there  ap- 
peared the  Pharisees'  hatred  of  a  royal  house,  and 
their  determination  to  reestablish  their  doctrinaire 
Utopia  of  a  theocracy  of  scribes*  Disturbances  broke 
out  almost  immediately  after  the  gorgeous  funeral 
Archelaus  gave  his  father  at  Herodium.2  Archelaus 
had  been  saluted  as  king ;  but  although  he  had  taken 
his  seat  upon  a  golden  throne,  he  had  been  careful 
not  to  accept  the  title.  None  the  less,  the  bodies  of 
the  people  came  to  him  demanding  reforms  in  taxa- 
tion, the  release  of  those  imprisoned  by  Herod,  and 
the  abolition  of  taxes  on  sales.  Archelaus  agreed  to 
these  demands,  but  the  more  extreme  members  of  the 
Pharisees  were  unwilling  to  let  the  opportunity  pass 
without  obtaining  revenge.  Shortly  before  the  death 
of  Herod,  two  prominent  rabbis,  Judas  and  Mattathias, 
had  incited  their  students  to  tear  down  the  golden 
eagle  over  the  great  gate  of  the  temple.  Herod  had 

1  General  References :    Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  II.  38-43  ;  Eenan,  History  of  the 
People  of  Israel,  bk.  x.  cli.  9  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  II. 
118-128  ;  Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  V.  449-457. 

2  Ant.  xvii.  8  :  3. 

130 


AECHELAUS  131 

thereupon  caused  the  ringleaders  to  be  burnt.  The 
Pharisees  now  demanded  the  punishment  of  those 
persons  who  had  been  instrumental  in  the  executions. 
Lacking  any  authority  for  reversing  the  action  of  his  * 
father,  Archelaus  very  properly  endeavoured  to  delay 
action  until  after  his  position  had  been  made  certain 
by  Caesar.  But  all  his  efforts  proved  unavailing.  The 
popular  leaders  continued  to  excite  the  people,  and  at 
the  Passover  following  the  death  of  Herod  the  Jews 
assembled  in  crowds  at  the  temple,  threatening  revolu- 
tion. Archelaus,  fearing  that  they  might  do  some 
irreparable  damage  to  the  state,  had  his  troops  attack 
them,  and  when  the  crowds  dispersed  to  their  homes 
they  had  lost  three  thousand  of  their  number. 

Thinking  that  order  had  been  restored,  Archelaus,  Archelaus 
accompanied  by  his  friends,  his  aunt  Salome,  and  inRome- 
many  of  his  other  relatives,  went  off  to  Eome,  leaving 
his  brother  Philip  as  his  representative  in  Judea. 
Shortly  afterward  Antipas  also  went  up  to  Eome,  with 
the  purpose  of  persuading  Augustus  to  ratify  that  will 
of  Herod  by  which  he  had  been  made  king.  During 
the  absence  of  Archelaus  the  country  was  cursed  with 
a  succession  of  Jewish  fanatics,  Galilean  robbers, 
who  declared  themselves  kings,  and  Eoman  peculators. 
Judea  became  full  of  anarchy.  The  propraetor  of 
Syria,  Varus,  after  having  subdued  one  uprising  at  Anarchy. 
Jerusalem,  returned  to  Antioch,  leaving  one  legion 
under  Sabinus,  his  procurator,  to  maintain  order.  But 
Sabinus  not  only  had  little  but  police  powers,  but  far 
worse,  soon  proved  to  be  more  eager  to  get  posses- 
sion of  the  treasures  left  by  Herod  than  to  check  the 
rapidly  increasing  revolt.  At  the  feast  of  Pentecost 
the  Jews  renewed  hostilities  and  seized  the  temple 
area.  There  from  the  roofs  of  the  cloisters  they  main- 
tained a  desperate  and  successful  fight  against  the 
Eomans;  until  the  latter  set  the  cloisters  on  fire.  All 


132      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  appeal 
to  Rome. 


The  decision 
of  Augustus. 


of  the  Jews  then  perished,  and  the  Eomans  got 
possession  of  most  of  the  treasures  of  the  temple, 
Sabinus  openly  taking  four  hundred  talents.  The 
revolt  was  finally  put  down  by  Varus  with  great 
slaughter,  two  thousand  Jews  being  crucified. 

While  thus  Judea  was  in  the  greatest  disorder,  a 
most  extraordinary  gathering  of  Jews  and  their 
rulers  was  being  held  in  Eome.  The  Pharisees  now 
attempted  lawfully  what  their  lunatic  followers  had 
sought  by  rebellion.  With  the  permission  of  Varus 
an  embassy  of  fifty  prominent  Jews  proceeded  to 
Eome  to  endeavour  to  prevent  the  appointment  of 
Archelaus  as  king.  There  they  were  joined  by  eight 
thousand  members  of  the  Jewish  colony  in  Eome,  and 
sought  to  get  Judea  incorporated  in  the  province  of 
Syria  in  hopes  that  they  might  have  more  liberty  to 
live  by  their  own  laws.1 

At  the  suggestion  of  Varus,  Philip  also  went  to 
Eome  to  aid  Archelaus,  or  to  have  some  share  in  the 
distribution  of  Herod's  estate. 

Augustus  gave  the  petitioners  several  audiences,2 
and  at  last  practically  confirmed  the  last  will  of  Herod. 
Archelaus  was  to  have  Judea,  Samaria,  and  Idumea, 
with  a  tribute  of  six  hundred  talents.  He  was  to 
have  at  first  the  title  of  ethnarch,  and  later,  in  case 
he  governed  well,  the  title  of  king.  Herod  Antipas 
was  given  Galilee  and  Perea,  with  the  annual  tribute 
of  two  hundred  talents  and  the  title  of  tetrarch. 
Philip  was  given  the  same  title,  the  regions  of  Gaul- 
anitis,  Auranitis,  Trachonitis,  Batanea,  Banias,  and 
Iturea,  with  an  income  of  one  hundred  talents.  The 
cities  of  Gaza,  Gadara,  and  Hippos  were,  however,  ex- 
cluded from  this  division  and  made  subject  directly  to 
Syria.  Herod's  provisions  for  Salome  were  confirmed, 


1  Ant.  xvii.  11 : 1. 


2  Ant.  xvii.  9  :  6-7. 


ARCHELAUS  133 

and  in  addition  she  was  given  a  palace  at  Ascalon. 
The  other  relatives  of  Herod  received  the  bequests 
contained  in  his  will.  Augustus  further  made  hand- 
some presents  of  money  to  Herod's  two  daughters,  and 
divided  the  sum  left  himself  among  the  dead  king's 
sons.1 

The  character  of  the  ethnarch,  Archelaus,2  was,  in  Character  ot 
most  respects,  like  that  of  Herod,  without  its  better  Archelaus- 
qualities.  Like  his  father,  he  was  a  builder.  He  re- 
stored the  royal  palace  at  Jericho,  which  had  been 
burned  during  the  disturbances  that  had  occurred 
while  he  had  been  in  Eome,  and  planted  and  irrigated 
new  palm  groves  in  its  vicinity.  He  also  built  a  town 
in  the  Jordan  valley,  near  Phasaelis,  which  he  called 
after  himself,  Archelais.  Like  his  father  also,  he 
dealt  wantonly  with  the  high  priests,  removing  one 
and  appointing  another,  twice  during  his  reign  of  ten 
years.3  He  still  further  shocked  the  sensibilities  of 
the  people  by  marrying  the  widow  of  his  half-brother, 
Alexander,  by  whom  she  had  had  children.4  Glaphyra, 
however,  died  soon  after  her  marriage,  after  having 

1  Ant.  xvii.  11 :  4,  5. 

2  Or,  as  he  is  called  on  his  coins,  HPflAOT  E9NAPXOT.  — 
Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  114-118. 

3  Ant.  xvii.  13  : 1.    He  deposed  Joazar  because  of  his  share 
in  the  political  disturbances,  and  appointed  his  brother  Eleazer. 
Shortly  afterward  he  replaced  Eleazer  by  Jesus.    It  would  seem 
that  he  reinstated  Joazar,  but  whether  before  or  after  the  death 
of  the  high  priest  Jesus  it  is  impossible  to  tell  (Ant.  xviii.  2:1). 

4  It  was  this  latter  fact  that  made  the  marriage  with  Arche- 
laus unlawful.    Glaphyra  had  been  also  the  wife  of  Juba,  from 
whom  she  seems  to  have  separated.     Josephus,  it  is  true,  says 
she  married  after  the  death  of  Juba,  but  this  statement  is  contra- 
dicted by  the  coins  of  Juba.    She  is  mentioned  on  an  inscrip- 
tion in  Athens.     It  is  characteristic  of  the  spirit  of  the  times 
that  Josephus  expresses  little  dislike  at  the  reckless  intermarry- 
ing of  the  Herods,  but  calls  attention  to  this  purely  technical 
transgression  of  the  marriage  laws. 


134      NEW  TESTAMENT   TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

had  a  dream  sufficiently  striking  to  be  recorded  by 
Josephus.1 

Thedeposi-  The  reign  of  Archelaus  is  described  by  Josephus, 
Archelaus  briefly,  as  being  barbarous  and  tyrannical,  although  he 
gives  us  no  basis  for  the  characterization  except  the  facts 
just  stated.  But  that  he  is  correct  seems  clear,  from 
the  fact  that  in  A.D.  6  the  principal  men  of  Judea  and 
Samaria,  together  with  the  sons  of  Herod,  accused 
him,  before  Augustus,  of  mismanaging  his  territory. 
Augustus  was  very  angry,  and  immediately  despatched 
the  representative  of  Archelaus  in  Eome  to  summon 
him  to  trial.  The  messenger  hurried  Archelaus  from 
a  banquet  to  the  imperial  court,  where  he  was  con- 
demned, A.D.  6,  and  sentenced  to  the  confiscation  of 
his  property,  and  to  banishment  at  Vienne,  in  Gaul, 
where  he  probably  died.2  Quirinius  was  sent  to  make 
a  census  of  the  taxable  property  of  Judea,  as  a  first 
step  in  its  organization  as  a  province.3  Such  organiza- 

1  Ant.  xvii.  13  : 4.     Josephus  justifies  himself  for  recording 
this  dream  and  another  of  Archelaus,  on  the  ground  that  they 
confirm  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  the  providence  of  God. 
Quite  as  likely  a  reason  is  to  be  found  in  his  inability  to  find 
other  material  with  which  to  describe  the  reign  of  Archelaus. 
Apparently  Nicholas  of  Damascus,  hitherto  his  chief  source,  had 
nothing  on  this  period. 

2  Jerome,  however,  declared  his  grave  was  near  Bethlehem. 

8  The  census  of  Quirinius  (or  Cyrenius)  has  given  rise  to  no 
little  discussion,  because  of  its  relation  to  that  mentioned  in 
Luke  2:1.  While  it  is  by  no  means  probable  that  Quirinius 
twice  made  a  census,  once  during  the  life  of  Herod  I.,  it  is  not 
absolutely  impossible.  In  the  present  lack  of  data,  any  abso- 
lute certainty  is  out  of  the  question.  See  Huschke,  Census  zur 
Zeit  des  Geburt  Jesu  Christi ;  Wieseler,  Chronological  Synopsis 
of  the  Gospels  ;  Zumpt,  Das  Geburtsjahr  Christi ;  Schtirer,  Div. 
I.  II.  105-142.  The  discovery  of  papyri  records  of  household 
enrolments  at  intervals  of  fourteen  years  in  Egypt,  together 
with  other  evidence  going  to  prove  the  existence  of  similar  en- 
rolments in  Syria,  gives  new  weight  to  the  arguments  of  Wiese- 
ler and  Zumpt.  See  Kamsay,  Was  Christ  Born  in  Bethlehem? 


AECHELAUS  135 

tion  was  completed  when  Idumea,  Samaria,  and  Judea 
were  put  under  Coponius  as  procurator. 

But  this  reorganization  was  not  accomplished  with-  Revolts 
out  bloodshed.  The  census,  hateful  alike  on  religious  the°census 
and  political  grounds,  met  with  fanatical  opposition. 
It  is  true  that  the  Jews,  as  a  whole,  did  not  revolt, 
and  singularly  enough  the  disturbance  broke  out  in 
Galilee,  which  was  not  subject  to  the  census.  But  the 
Zealots  —  whom  now  for  the  first  time  Josephus  de- 
scribes l  —  were  not  over-sensitive  to  consistency,  and 
under  one  Judas  a  Galilean  and  one  Sadduc  a  Pharisee 
rose  against  their  new  masters  in  full  belief  that  God 
would  aid  them  in  achieving  liberty.  Josephus  him- 
self sees  in  them  the  originators  of  the  war  of  66—70. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  this  religious  and  political  outbreak 
was  the  expression  of  the  new  party  spirit  among  theN 
Jews.  The  Zealots,  like  the  Pharisees,  awaited  a  king- 
dom of  God,  a  Messiah,  and  a  new  Israel,2  but  their 
kingdom  was  to  be  won  by  the  sword — not,  it  should 
be  noticed,  however,  from  persecutors  like  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  but  from  purely  political  masters  who 
allowed  the  Jews  every  conceivable  religious  liberty 

1  Ant.  xviii.  1:6.  *  ^nt.  xviii.  1  : 1-6. 


CHAPTER  XII 


Political 
divisions  of 
Palestine. 


1.  Judea. 


Samaria. 


PALESTINE  UNDER  THE  ROMANS  AND    THE    TETRARCHS  l 

EXCLUSIVE  of  the  Greek  cities,  Palestine  was  broken 
into  three  separate  administrative  districts,  the  prov- 
ince of  Judea  and  the  tetrarchies  of  Herod  Antipas 
and  Philip  —  a  division  that  seems  to  have  outlasted 
the  Jewish  nation  itself.2 

1.  Of  these  three  districts,  the  most  important  in 
all  respects  was  the  province  of  Judea,  over  which  were 
the  procurators.  It  was  composed  of  three  parts,  each 
historically  distinct  from  each  other.  Samaria  lay  be- 
tween Judea  and  Galilee,  corresponding  roughly  to  the 
ancient  Northern  Kingdom  of  Israel,  except  that  it  no 
longer  included  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  Jenin  being  its 
northern  border.3  It  apparently  extended  from  the 
Jordan  to  the  maritime  plain,  but  its  northern  boun- 
dary was  never  long  fixed.  Josephus  gives  the  Acra- 
battene  toparchy,  the  village  Annath  or  Borceas,4  and 
Korea,5  as  on  the  border.  It  was  and  is  a  fertile  region, 

1  General  Eeferences :   Schiirer,  The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  II.  10-37,  43-104 ;  Div.  II.  I. 
163-195  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  II.  129-140  ;  Renan,  His- 
tory of  the  People  of  Israel,  bk.  xi. 

2  Palestina  Prima  corresponded  roughly  to  Judea  and  Sama- 
ria, with  a  part  of  Perea ;  Palestina  Secunda,  to  Galilee  and 
the  Decapolis. 

3  War,  iii.  4:1.  *  War,  iii.  3 :  5. 

6  Ant .  xiv.  3:4.     On  the  location  of  this  town  see  Schiirer, 
I.  I.  320  n.  ;  Smith,  Historical  Geography,  353  n.    The  latter 
136 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  ROMANS         137 

and  although  small,  —  its  area  being  even  less  than 
that  of  Galilee,1  —  like  Judea,  it  was  "  full  of  people  " 2 
whose  history  has  already  been  seen  to  have  been 
closely  interwoven  with  that  of  the  Jews  proper. 

Judea,  the  most  important  division  of  the  country,  Judea. 
and  that  which  gave  its  name  to  the  province,  extended 
from  Samaria  to  the  desert,  and  from  the  Jordan  to 
the  maritime  plain,  the  cities  of  which,  even  Joppa 
and  Jamnia,  thoroughly  Jewish  though  they  were,  not 
being  counted  as  a  part  of  it.3  Its  area  was  approxi- 
mately two  thousand  square  miles.  It  was  divided 
into  eleven  toparchies,  at  the  head  of  which  was  Jeru- 
salem,4 although  the  official  residence  of  the  procura- 
tor was  Csesarea.  Jerusalem,  alone  of  all  the  towns  of 
Judea,  was  a  city  in  anything  like  the  Grseco-Eoman 
sense.  The  nature  of  these  toparchies  is  not  alto-  Toparchies. 
gether  clear,  but  probably  they  consisted  of  a  town  and 
its  surrounding  country.  The  smaller  towns  of  Judea 
do  not  seem  to  have  been  very  much  organised,  and 
were  probably  dependent  upon  some  larger  city  or 

seems  over-cautious  about  identifying  it  with  Kurawa,  at  the 
junction  of  Wady  Farah  and  the  Jordan  valley,  at  the  foot  of 
Surtabeh. 

1  Approximately  forty  by  thirty-five  miles. 

2  War,  iii.  3:4.  3  War^  m  3  . 5. 

4  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist.  v.  70,  gives  ten,  among  them  being  Jeru- 
salem. These  other  toparchies  were  those  of  Gophna,  Acra- 
batta,  Thamina,  Lydda,  Emmaus,  Idumea,  Engaddi,  Herodium, 
and  Jericho  (TFar,  iii.  3,  5).  Pella  is  added  as  the  eleventh, 
but  from  its  location  in  the  list  (which  evidently  gives  the  names 
in  order  about  Jerusalem,  beginning  at  the  north)  it  is  evidently 
not  the  city  of  that  name  in  the  Decapolis.  Schiirer  (Div.  II. 
I.  157)  corrects  the  list  by  substituting  for  it  Bethleptepha,  on 
the  evidence  of  War,  iv.  8 : 1.  See  also  Kuhn,  Stddtische  und 
burgerliclie  Verfassung  des  romischen  Reichs,  II.  339  sq.  It 
is  perhaps  worth  noticing  that  as  early  as  the  Persian  su- 
premacy there  existed  administrative  districts  in  Judea.  Neh. 
3  ;  Meyer,  Entstehung  des  Judenthums,  166-168. 


138      NEW  TESTAMENT   TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Organisa- 
tion of 
towns. 


Idumea. 


metropolis.1  If  this  conjecture  be  correct,  we  have 
another  parallel  between  the  Graeco-Egyptian  and  the 
G-rseco-Jewish  administration.  These  villages  had 
their  own  councils  or  sanhedrins  which  tried  civil 
and  less  important  criminal  cases,  and  were  probably 
administered  by  "  village-clerks  "  (Kcojuoya/Ajutareis) 2  pre- 
cisely as  in  Egypt.  The  relation  of  Jerusalem  to  these 
toparchies  was  something  more  than  that  of  a  merely 
nominal  head.  Itself  the  one  great  city  out  of  the 
twenty-nine  which  Judea  boasted,  its  Council,  or  San- 
hedrin,  not  only  was  the  court  of  appeal,  but  its  offi- 
cials collected  the  tribute  paid  to  the  Romans.3  Its 
position  is  to  be  seen  also  in  the  fact  that  in  the  great 
rebellion  it  organised  all  Judea  and,  at  least  imper- 
fectly, Galilee  against  their  enemy.  This  superiority, 
however,  did  not  extend  over  the  Greek  cities  of  Judea, 
which  were  either  like  Csesarea  directly  attached  to 
the  province  of  Syria,4  or  held  as  the  private  property 
of  some  favoured  person.5 

Idumea  was  the  district  lying  to  the  south  of  Judea 
proper,  including  the  Negeb  and  the  southern  She- 
phelah.  John  Hyrcanus  conquered  it,  and  compelled 
its  inhabitants  to  receive  the  law  of  Moses  and  circum- 
cision.6 Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  its  inhabitants 
were  regarded  as  the  descendants  of  Isaac  only  through 
Esau  and  that  the  Herodian  family  originated  within 

1  Thus  Emmaus  was  the  metropolis  of  its  toparchy  (  War,  iv. 
8:1;  Ant.  xviii.  2  :  2)  and  there  is  said  to  have  been  a  toparchy 
of  Jamnia. 

2  Ant.  xvi.  7  :  3. 

3  War,  ii.  17  : 1.     Cf.  Ant.  xiv.  4  :  4. 
*  War,  i.  21  : 7. 

5  Thus  Herod  bequeathed  Jamnia,  Azotus,  and  Phasaelis  to 
his  sister  Salome  (Ant.  xvii.  8:1),  and  she  in  turn  left  Jam- 
nia, Phasaelis,  and  Archelais  to  the  Empress  Julia  (Ant.  xviii. 
2:2). 

6  Ant.  xiii.  9:1. 


PALESTINE   UNDER    THE  ROMANS         139 

it,  Idumea  was  treated  as  Jewish,  since  descendants 
of  three  generations  were  regarded  as  real  Jews.1  In 
the  time  of  Christ  this  was  increasingly  true,  and 
during  the  War,  the  Idumeans  were  among  the  most 
fanatical  of  all  the  revolutionists.2  It  is  not  possible 
to  discover  the  exact  political  relations  of  Idumea  to 
the  province,  but  it  would  seem  to  have  been  treated 
as  a  toparchy.3 

These  three  little  districts  were  joined  into  Judea,  The  fiscal 
an  imperial  province  of  the  second  rank,  governed 
by  a  procurator  who  was  of  the  equestrian  rank,  rator. 
Strictly  speaking,  Judea  was  not  a  part  of  Syria,  al- 
though in  one  or  two  exceptional  cases  the  legate  of  that 
province  seems  to  have  possessed  some  power  over  the 
procurators.4  But  apart  from  these  exceptional  cases 
the  procurator  was  vested  with  full  powers.  Prima- 
rily a  fiscal  agent,  his  office  naturally  kept  him  at  the 
head  of  the  administration  of  the  taxes  and  the  cus- 
toms. Of  the  two,  the  taxes  were  more  directly  under 
his  control,  although  under  the  empire  the  Roman 
governors  were  no  longer  able  to  abuse  the  provincials 
as  under  the  republic.  In  fact,  they  had  become  sal- 
aried officials,  and  whatever  taxes  were  collected  — 
in  the  case  of  Judea,  probably  six  hundred  talents  — 

i  Deut.  23  :  7,  8.  2  War,  iv.  4:4.  8  War,  iii.  3 :  5. 

4  For  example,  Vitellius  over  Pontius  Pilate,  Ant.  xviii.  4  :  2, 
although  Vitellius  apparently  had  unusual  powers.  See  also 
Ant.  xviii.  8:2-9;  xx.  1:1;  War,  ii.  14  :  3  ;  16  :  1  ;  18  :  9. 
See  Mommsen,  Provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire,  II.  201  n. ; 
Marquardt,  Romische  Staatsverwaltung,  I.  554  sq.  Provinces 
of  a  similar  rank  were  Noricum,  Mauritania,  Thrace,  and  Egypt, 
none  which  was  of  sufficient  importance  to  necessitate  men  of 
consular  or  praetorian  rank,  but  which  was  at  the  same  time  of 
sufficient  military  importance  to  keep  it  in  the  hands  of  the 
emperor  rather  than  the  Senate.  See  Tacitus,  History,  i.  11 ; 
Strabo,  Geography,  xvii.  3  : 25.  Full  references  in  Schiirer, 
Div.  I.  II.  46  sq. 


140      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

were  expended  as  far  as  necessary  upon  the  province 
itself  for  public  improvements  like  roads,  harbours, 
public  buildings,  and  the  remainder  was  sent  to  the 
imperial  treasury  (fiscus).1  It  was  probably  for  this 

Taxes.  collection  of  taxes  that  Judea  had  been  divided  into 

toparchies,  and  to  the  sanhedrin  of  each  was  proba- 
bly assigned  the  duty  of  collecting  the  tax  levied  upon 
it.2  These  taxes,  however,  were  no  longer  farmed, 
but  collected  by  imperial  officials.3  Naturally  the 
procurator  of  Judea  could  levy  no  taxes  upon  the 
tetrarchies  of  Antipas  and  Philip, 

Customs.  But  if  the  taxes  were  officially  collected,  the  customs 

were  farmed.  They  were  of  almost  every  conceivable 
sort,  —  export  duties,  import  duties,  octroi,  bridge  and 
harbour  duties,  market  taxes,  tax  on  salt,  —  and  were 
sold  out  to  speculators,  who  in  turn  sold  their 
rights  to  various  collectors.  The  men  who  actually 
did  the  collecting  —  the  publicans  (moJches)  of  the 
New  Testament  —  were  thus  exposed  to  the  strong- 
est temptation  to  misuse  their  position,  and  no  class  of 
men  was  ever  more  cordially  hated.  However  much 
the  local  authorities  might  attempt  to  regulate  the 

1  The  expense  of  the  imperial  post  was  met  by  the  towns 
themselves.    It  was  not  until  the  time  of  Septimius  Severus 
that  it  was  met  from  the  fiscus.    Friedlander,  Sittengeschichte 
der  Homer,  II.  19. 

2  Marquardt,  Edmische  Staatsverwaltung,  I.  501.     The  chief 
direct  taxes  were  the  Capitation ;  the  tribute  of  one  per  cent 
upon  the  wealth  of  the  province ;  the  annona,  or  annual  con- 
tribution of  grain  and  cattle  for  the  support  of  the  army ;  the 
angarice,  a  sort  of  corvee.     See  an  article  by  Goldschmid,  in 
Eevue  des  jtftudes  juives,  vol.  34;  192,  "Impdts  et  Droits  de 
Douane  en  Jude'e  sous  les  Romains"  ;  Arnold,  Roman  Provin- 
cial Administration;  Marquardt,  Eomische  Staatsverwaltung, 
II.  261  sq.     Vitellius  (Ant.  xviii.  4  : 3)  released  the  Jews  from 
a  tax  on  fruit. 

8  Marquardt,  Eomische  Staatsverwaltung,  II.  303. 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  BOM  AN  8        141 

import,  the  despised  collectors  were  always  able  to 
levy  blackmail  and  practise  extortion.1 

In  addition  to  his  fiscal  duties  the  procurator  had  Military  and 
military  and  judicial  powers  that  easily  made  him  powers  of 
master  of  Judea.  Except  at  feasts,  only  a  single  theprocu- 
cohort  was  stationed  at  Jerusalem.  His  troops  con- 
sisted almost  exclusively  of  mercenaries,  chiefly  Sa- 
maritans,—  a  fact  that  did  not  make  toward  good 
feeling.  As  a  judge  he  had  the  power  of  life  and 
death,2  appeal  to  the  emperor  being  granted  only  in 
case  of  Roman  citizens,  and  then  only  after  formal 
protest  had  been  made.  Yet  the  number  of  cases 
actually  brought  before  the  procurator  was  probably 
small,  for  most  would  doubtless  be  settled  in  one  of 
the  toparchical  sanhedrins,  or  in  the  great  Sanhedrin 
of  Jerusalem,  where  the  Jewish  law  would  be  under- 
stood. Crimes  involving  capital  punishment  were, 
however,  in  his  hands,  although  it  is  not  quite  certain 
at  what  date  the  right  was  thus  restricted.3 

In  general  the  establishment  of  the  Eoman  adminis-  Relation  of 
tration  probably  affected  Jewish  society  but  little.  It 
may  even  have  been  acceptable  to  the  Pharisees,  if,  as 
Josephus  says,  the  government  fell  really  into  the 
hands  of  native  aristocracy  with  the  high  priest  at 
its  head.4  The  Jews  were  indeed  required  to  take  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  each  new  emperor,5  and  the  pro- 
curator, except  at  feasts,  kept  the  robe  of  the  high  priest 

1  In  general  see  on  "publicans,"  Schiirer,  Div.  I.  II.  68-71 ; 
Marquardt,  Romische  Staatsverwaltung,  II.  289  sq. ;  Edersheim, 
Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,  I.  515  sq. 

2  Ant.  xx.  1  :  1 ;  5:2. 

8  According  to  Jer.  Sanhedrin,  i.  1  and  vii.  2,  the  right  of 
pronouncing  death  sentences  was  taken  from  the  Sanhedrin 
forty  years  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  But  "forty  " 
can  hardly  be  exact. 

4  Ant.  xx.  10,  5  See  Ant.  xviii.  5  :  3. 


142      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  Jews 

uot 

oppressed. 


Local 
courts. 


locked  up  in  the  castle  of  Anton ia,1  but  such  require- 
ments were  more  than  offset  by  the  religious  liberty 
given  the  Jews,  the  guaranteed  sanctity  of  the  temple, 
and  the  general  leniency  shown  their  intense  religious 
feeling.  Apart  from  the  Zealots  it  is  probable  that 
there  was  but  a  minority  of  the  inhabitants  of  Judea 
that  did  not  assent  heartily  to  the  daily  sacrifices  of 
two  lambs  and  an  ox  for  the  welfare  of  the  emperor.2 
Such  examples  of  tolerance  as  the  recognition  of  the 
Sabbath,  the  omission  of  the  emperor's  head  on  the 
copper  coinage  of  the  country,  the  leaving  of  military 
standards  outside  Jerusalem,  the  recognition  of  the 
Jews'  right  to  kill  even  a  Roman  citizen  who  went 
beyond  the  court  of  the  Gentiles  in  the  temple,3 
are  as  creditable  to  the  Romans  as  indicative  of  the 
extraordinary  religious  fervour  of  the  Jews  them- 
selves. Indeed,  from  the  days  of  Julius  Caesar  the 
Jews  had  enjoyed  special  favours  from  the  Romans, 
who,  it  will  be  remembered,  seldom  interfered  with  a 
conquered  people's  customs  and  institutions  further 
than  was  absolutely  necessary  in  the  interest  of  good 
administration. 

In  the  case  of  Judea  the  native  courts  or  sanhedrins 
were  also  left  in  possession  of  considerable  powers  of 
local  jurisdiction  and  administration,  and  the  people 
were  thus  allowed  large  opportunity  for  pursuing  the 
practice  as  well  as  the  study  of  the  Law. 

It  is  here  that  one  meets  the  culminating  institution 
of  legalistic  Judaism  —  the  Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem. 
If  the  various  rabbinical  traditions  concerning  its 

1  Ant.  xviii.  4  :  3.     After  36  A.D.  the  Jews  were  entrusted 
with  the  robe. 

2  War,  ii.  10  : 4  ;  17  :  2-4. 

8  The  tablet  establishing  this  latter  fact  was  discovered  in 
Jerusalem  by  Clermont  Ganneau  in  1871,  and  is  now  in  Con- 
stantinople. 


PALESTINE   UNDER    THE  ROMANS         143 

origin  be  disregarded,  the  Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem  The  Sanhe- 
may  be  said  to  have  been  essentially  the  Gerousia  of  drin* 
that  city  with  changed  powers  and  character.  As 
merely  a  town-council  its  powers  had  sensibly  dimin- 
ished from  the  death  of  Simon,  and  it  had  become 
increasingly  judicial  and  academic  in  character.  At 
the  same  time  it  had  doubtless  grown  in  the  estimation 
of  the  people  at  large,  and,  as  it  grew  predominantly 
Pharisaic,  its  prestige  and  influence  still  more  in- 
creased.1 Under  Aristobulus  II  and  Antigonus  it  is 
true  its  membership  was  largely  from  the  Sadducees, 
but  the  massacre  of  forty-five  of  its  members  by 
Herod  immediately  after  his  victory  over  Antigonus2 
again  opened  the  way  for  Pharisaic  predominance. 
Thus  under  Herod  the  Sanhedrin  first  became  the 
creature  of  the  king,  ready  even  to  condemn  the  un- 
fortunate Hyrcanus,3  but  lost  practically  all  of  such 
administrative  powers  as  it  still  retained.  With  the  Powers  of 
establishment  of  the  provincial  government,  it  re- 
gained many  of  such  powers,  and,  in  addition,  became 
the  supreme  court  for  all  cases  of  importance  —  civil, 
criminal,  and  religious  —  under  the  Mosaic  law.  That 
it  had  any  jurisdiction  in  Galilee  during  the  reign  of 
Herod  Antipas  seems  unlikely,  although  its  decisions 
on  legal  points,  especially  concerning  marriage,  di- 
vorce, genealogies,  heresies,  and  the  calendar,  would 
undoubtedly  be  received  as  final  by  all  Jews.  In 
Judea  proper  it  could  make  arrests,  try  and  condemn 
criminals  to  any  punishment  except  death,  without 

1  See  Kuhn,  Die  stddtische  und  burgerliche  Verfassung  des 
rom.  Reiclis,  II.  336,  337. 

2  For  so  Ant.  xiv.  9:4,  in  which  Herod  is  said  to  have  killed 
"  all  those  in  the  Sanhedrin,"  is  to  be  combined  with  Ant.  xv. 
1 : 2,  where  he  is  said  to  have  killed  forty-five  of  "  the  leaders  in 
the  party  of  Antigonus." 

8  Ant.  xv.  6:2. 


144      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

any  ratification  on  the  part  of  the  procurator.  In  all 
capital  cases  condemnation  could  not  be  pronounced 
until  after  a  night  had  passed,  but  no  such  restriction 
applied  to  acquittal.  All  decisions  were  apparently- 
made  by  a  majority,  but  in  convictions  this  must  not 
be  less  than  two. 

Composition  The  Sanhedrin  met  on  Mondays  and  Thursdays  in  its 
Sanhedrin.  own  building/  which  probably  stood  on  the  west  side 
of  the  temple  mount.  It  was  composed  of  seventy- 
two  members  of  pure  Hebrew  descent;  twenty-three 
constituting  a  quorum.  How  the  members  were  ap- 
pointed is  uncertain,  but  they  were  inducted  into  the 
body  by  the  laying  on  of  hands.  They  were  not  all 
of  equal  rank;  the  members  of  the  high  priestly 
families  (dpxtepets)  being  naturally  the  more  important. 
The  other  members  of  the  body  were  called  scribes 
(y/oa/x,/xaT€ts),  or  simply  elders  (7r/oecr/2irrepoi).  The  latter 
two  classes  were  doubtless  Pharisees.2  The  Sanhedrin 
seems  to  have  been  organised  with  the  high  priest  as 
president,  and  with  the  Committee  of  Ten  (Se'/ca  TT/OCOTOI), 
so  common  in  Graeco-Eoman  towns.3 
Procurators.  Of  the  early  procurators  4  there  is  very  little  known. 


r,  vi.  6  :  3. 

2  See  Schiirer,  Div.  II.  I.  177  n.     The  three  classes  are  men- 
tioned in  Mat.   27  :  41  ;   Mk.   11  :  27  ;   14  :  43,  53  ;   15  :  1  ;  the 
chief   priests  and  scribes,    Mat.    2:4;    20  :  18  ;   21  :  15  ;   Mk. 
10  :  33  ;    11  :  18  ;    14  :  1  ;    15  :  31  ;    Lk.    22  :  2,  66  ;   23  :  10;   the 
chief  priests  and  elders,  Mat.  21  :  23  ;  26  :  3,  47  ;  27  :  1,  3,  12, 
20  ;  28  :  11,  12  ;  Acts  4  :  23  ;  23  :  14  ;  25  :  15  ;  the  chief  priests 
and  the  entire   Sanhedrin,    Mat.  26  :  59  ;    Mk.   14  :  55  ;  Acts 
22  :  30. 

3  The  offices  of  the  Nasi,  president,  as  distinct  from  the 
high  priest,  and  of  the  Ab-beth-din,  vice-president,  are  later 
even  than  the  Mishna,  but  have  been  read  back    into  New 
Testament  times  by  the  rabbis.     Wellhausen,  Pharisder  und 
Sadducaer,  29-43. 

4  Coponius,  7-9  ;  M.  Ambivius,  9-12  ;  Annius  Rufus,  12-16  ; 
Valerius  Gratus,  15-26. 


PALESTINE  UNDER   THE  ROMANS        145 

They  had  the  power  of  removing  and  appointing  high, 
priests,  but  judged  Jews  according  to  Jewish  law. 
Their  office  was  not  an  easy  one,  and  the  fanatical 
hatred  of  the  Jews  and  Samaritans  was  constantly 
leading  to  outbreaks  requiring  severe  punishment.1 
Of  them  all,  Pontius  Pilate  is  best  known,  not  merely  Pontius 
from  the  gospels,  but  from  Philo2  and  Josephus.  The  *  ate< 
former  describes  him  as  of  an  "unbending  and  reck- 
lessly hard  character,"  while  the  latter  gives  various 
incidents  of  his  alleged  oppression.3  At  this  distance, 
however,  one  of  these  acts  seems  to  have  been  due 
to  inexperience;  and  the  others  —  the  use  of  temple 
treasures  to  build  an  aqueduct,  and  the  punishment 
of  the  Samaritans  for  what  certainly  looks  like  an 
incipient  revolution  —  seem  those  of  a  man  very  much 
in  earnest  to  maintain  order  and  give  a  good  adminis- 
tration.4 The  fact  that  Tiberius,  who  was  especially 
attentive  to  the  provinces,  left  him  in  office  for  ten 
years,  is  distinctly  in  his  favour  —  a  fact  that  his  con- 
demnation under  Caligula  does  not  seriously  affect. 

2.   Altogether  independent  of  the  procurators  were  2.  The 
the  tetrarchies   given  the  two  sons  of  Herod.5    Of  7  of 

1  For  example,  when  the  Samaritans  threw  bones  into  the 
temple  area  just  before  a  Passover  for  the  purpose  of  polluting 
it  (Ant.  xviii.  2:2). 

2  The  Legation  to  Caius,  §  38. 

8  Ant.  xviii.  3  :  1,  2  ;  4  :  1,  2  ;   War,  ii.  9  : 2-4. 

4  See  also  Lk.  13  :  1. 

5  The  office  of  tetrarch  was  by  no  means  uncommon.    Pliny, 
Natural  History,  v.  23  : 82,  says  there  were  seventeen  in  Syria 
alone.     They  were  not  unlike  allied  kings,  but  were  of  less  im- 
portance.    It  does  not  appear  that  either  Herod  Antipas   or 
Philip  paid  any  tax  or  tribute  to  Rome,  although  each  doubt- 
less made  the  customary  presents  to  the  emperor  and  were 
compelled  to  furnish  military  and  other  aid  at  the  call  of  the 
propraetor  of   Syria.     To  their  position  as  guardians  of  the 
frontier  was  doubtless  due  their  freedom  to  build  fortresses  and 
fortify  cities,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  there  was  no  prohibition 

L 


146      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

these  two,  that  of  Philip  embraced  the  territory  lying 
between  the  Yarmuk,  the  Jordan,  Mount  Hermon,  and 
Damascus  and  the  desert,  but  its  boundaries  are  very 
difficult  to  locate  exactly.  It  was  composed  of  a 
number  of  small  districts  (Batanea,  Trachonitis,  Gaul- 
anitis,  Iturea,  Auranitis),  which  had  been  conquered 
by  Jewish  rulers,  especially  Herod  I,  or  which  had 
been  given  Herod  I  by  Rome.  This  heterogeneous 
tetrarchy,  after  having  been  raised  to  a  kingdom  by 
Caligula,  continued  its  political  life  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem. 1 

The  tetrarch  Philip  (4  B.C.-34  A.D.)  was  the  most 

against  their  maintaining  an  army,  and  even  waging  war  upon 
a  border  king  (Ant.  xviii.  5:1)  like  Aretas  of  Arabia.  Indeed, 
the  defeat  of  Herod  was  the  occasion  of  a  campaign  by  the 
propraetor  of  Syria,  Vitellius,  at  the  command  of  Tiberius. 
It  was  only  when  his  military  preparations  were  interpreted 
to  mean  revolt  that  Herod  Antipas  was  banished  by  Calig- 
ula (Ant.  xviii.  7:2).  The  tetrarch  had  the  right  of  coming 
money,  but  as  in  the  case  of  Herod  I,  this  was  probably  re- 
stricted to  copper  (Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews).  He  further 
raised  his  own  revenue,  probably  through  publicans  and  after 
the  Roman  fashions,  although  within  limits  set  by  the  emperor 
and  with  the  exemption  of  Roman  citizens  (Ant.  xvii.  11  : 4). 
That  the  Romans  collected  portoria,  or  taxes  on  goods  in  transit 
within  a  tetrarchate  seems  not  unlikely,  since,  to  judge  from 
Livy,  38  :  41,  Roman  citizens  were  free  from  them  (Mommsen, 
Eomisches  Staatsrecht,  iii.  1:691).  From  what  we  can  infer 
from  the  statements  of  Josephus,  it  would  seem  as  if  the  degree 
of  independence  enjoyed  by  Jewish  tetrarchs  varied  under  dif- 
ferent emperors,  but  that  they  were  always  subject  to  imperial 
displeasure  and  without  recourse  against  removal  or  punish- 
ment of  any  sort.  Their  independence  from  the  procurator  of 
Judea,  however,  seems  complete  (cf.  Lk.  23  : 6,  11),  and  even 
the  propraetor  of  Syria  interfered  with  their  affairs  only  at  the 
command  of  the  emperor  himself. 

1  According  to  Lk.  3  : 1  there  was  another  tetrarchy,  that 
of  Abilene,  over  which  was  one  Lysanias.  Attempts  have  been 
made  by  some  writers  to  discredit  the  accuracy  of  this  state- 
ment, but  unsuccessfully. 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  ROMANS        147 

respectable  of  the  three  brothers  who  succeeded  Thecharac- 
Herod.  His  territory  was  not  Jewish,1  and  was  far 
less  productive  than  that  of  either  Archelaus  or  An- 
tipas,  yet  he  seems  to  have  been  content  to  live 
within  it,  especially  seeking  to  administer  justice. 
One  of  the  most  peaceful  pictures  of  these  years  is 
that  of  Philip  travelling  through  his  rough  dominions 
attended  by  a  few  chosen  friends,  and  sitting  as 
judge  in  the  market-places  of  the  cities  and  towns,  or 
wherever  a  case  had  to  be  tried. 2  Like  his  father,  he 
was  fond  of  building.  Banias  was  made  into  a  noble 
city,  with  rights  of  asylum,  which  he  named  Csesarea 
(Philippi),  and  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Jordan,  just 
above  its  entrance  into  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  he  made 
the  village  of  Bethsaida  into  a  city,  which,  in  honour 
of  the  daughter  of  Augustus,  he  called  Julias.  Re- 
moved from  the  influences  of  the  Jewish  life,  he  grew 
increasingly  Hellenistic,  and  again  like  his  father, 
built  many  temples  to  the  heathen  gods.  He  seems  His  reign, 
to  have  had  some  interest  in  scientific  matters,  for 
it  is  related  of  him  that  he  proved  (at  least  to  the 
satisfaction  of  his  own  time)  that  the  springs  at 
Banias  mark  the  emergence  of  an  underground  river, 
by  throwing  chaff  into  the  pool  of  Phiala.3  Further 
than  this,  little  is  known  of  his  reign,  except  that  he 
stamped  his  image  on  his  coins,  which,  although  not 
unprecedented  in  the  history  of  the  Jews,  is  sufficient 
to  show  his  Hellenistic  sympathies. 4  At  his  death, 

1  Yet  Herod  had  settled  a  colony  of  Jews  from  Babylon  in 
Batanea  ( Ant.  xvii.  2  : 1-3)  and  three  thousand  Idumeans  in 
Trachonitis  (Ant.  xvi.  9:2). 

2  Ant.  xviii.  4  :  6. 

8  War,  \\i.  10 :  7.  If  Phiala  was,  as  seems  probable,  Birket 
Ram,  such  an  experiment  would  hardly  have  met  with  the  suc- 
cess ascribed  to  it. 

4  Schtirer,  Div.  I.  II.  15,  is  here  in  error  in  saying  that  he 
was  the  first  Jewish  prince  to  engrave  his  likeness  on  his 


148     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


3.  Thetet- 
rarchy  of 
Herod 
Antipas. 


Galilee. 


his  territory,  though,  still  controlling  its  revenues,1 
was  added  to  Syria,  but  later  was  given  by  Caligula 
to  Herod  Agrippa  I  (37  A.D.),  with  the  title  of 
king. 

3.  Much  more  important  was  the  tetrarchy  of 
Herod  Antipas,  consisting  of  Galilee  and  Perea. 

In  popular  speech,  Galilee  was  divided  into  two 
parts  —  Upper  and  Lower.  Upper  Galilee  is  much 
higher  and  more  mountainous,  some  of  its  peaks 
reaching  nearly  four  thousand  feet;  while  Lower 
Galilee  has  rolling  hills  and  fine  valleys  in  which 
sycamores  grow  —  a  prime  distinction  in  the  Talmud. 
As,  however,  the  two  were  politically  a  unit,  it  is 
hardly  necessary  to  retain  the  division. 

On  the  north  Galilee  was  bounded  by  Tyre,  the  line 
running  approximately  through  Tell-el-Jcadi  to  the 
Litani;  on  the  east  by  the  Jordan  and  the  Sea  of 
Galilee  and  again  the  Jordan ; 2  on  the  south  by  the 
region  of  Scythopolis  and  Samaria,  the  line  running 
along  the  southern  edge  of  Esdraelon ; 3  and  on  the  west 
by  the  regions  of  Tyre,  which  included  Carmel 4  and 
Ptolemais.  Altogether  it  measured  fifty  or  sixty  miles 
north  and  south,  and  from  twenty-five  to  thirty-five 
east  and  west,  its  area  being  about  sixteen  hundred 
square  miles.  It  was  an  exceedingly  prosperous  region, 
full  of  vineyards  and  gardens,  villages  and  cities,  while 
its  beautiful  lake  —  the  Sea  of  Galilee  —  had  upon  its 
northwestern  side  the  plain  of  Gennesaret,  regarded 


coins.    Aristobulus  I  and  Alexandra  had  already  done  so.    The 
coins  are  reproduced  in  Stade,  II.  406. 

1  Ant.  xviii.  4:6. 

2  The  Sea  of   Galilee  probably  was  counted  to  Galilee,  for 
Josephus  (War,  iii.  3  : 1)  makes  the  eastern  border  of  Galilee 
the  regions  of  Hippos  and  Gadara  and  Gaulanitis. 

3  War,  iii.  4  : 1. 

4  Carmel  had  formerly  belonged  to  Galilee  (War,  iii.  3). 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  EOMANS         149 

by  Josephus  as  "an  ambitions  effort  of  nature  doing 
violence  to  herself  in  bringing  together  plants  of  dis- 
cordant habits,  with  an  admirable  rivalry  of  the  seasons, 
each  as  it  were,  asserting  her  rights  to  the  soil ;  a  spot 
where  grapes  and  figs  grew  during  ten  months  with- 
out intermission,  while  the  other  varieties  of  fruit 
ripened  the  year  round." l  Its  capital  was  Sepphoris, 
until  Herod  Antipas  transferred  that  honour  to  his 
new  city  of  Tiberias.  Under  the  later  Maccabees  and 
Herod  I,  Galilee  had  been  a  part  of  the  kingdom  of 
the  Jews,  but  after  the  death  of  Herod  I  it  was  sepa- 
rated from  the  rest  of  Palestine  and  given  as  a  tet- 
rarchy  to  Herod  Antipas.  Thereafter  it  retained  to 
some  degree  its  identity,  being  treated  probably  as  an 
administrative  unit ;  for  we  find  it  added  entire  to  the 
kingdom  of  Herod  Agrippa  I,  and  at  the  time  of  the 
Jewish  war  assigned  to  Josephus  for  organisation. 
There  is,  however,  no  certain  evidence  that  it  was 
ever  treated  as  a  separate  procuratorial  district.2 

Galilee  was  inhabited  by  Gentiles  and  Jews,  al- 
though the  latter  undoubtedly  predominated.  They  are 
called  Galileans,  but  whenever  contrasted  with  other  The  Gali 
peoples,  like  the  Eomans,  they  are  called  Jews,  as,  leans- 
indeed,  are  also  the  Samaritans  and  Pereans.3  But  it 
should  be  remembered  that  in  the  time  of  Jesus  this 
Jewish  element  had  not  been  long  resident  in  Galilee. 
Whatever  colonists  had  settled  there  prior  to  the 
Maccabean  revolt  had  been  removed  by  Simon.4  It 
was  probably  not  until  after  Aristobulus  conquered 
and  circumcised  the  Itureans,  or  North  Galileans, 

1  War,  iii.  3  : 2,  3. 

2  The  statement  of  Tacitus  to  this  effect  can  hardly  be  taken 
without  question,  since  it  involves  Josephus  in  complete  inac- 
curacy at  a  point  where  a  mistake  is  unlikely.     See  pp.  191,  193. 

3  War,  iii.  6:1-3;  7  : 3,  4,  5 ;  9:7;  10  :  3,  10 ;  iv.  1  :  8. 

4  1  Mace.  6  :  21-23  ;  Ant.  xii.  8  : 2. 


150     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

that  the  tide  of  Jewish  colonisation  really  set  in  again. 

Population  In  the  days  of  Josephus  the  region  was  densely  popu- 
lated, and  judging  from  the  ruins  surrounding  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  he 'is  exaggerat- 
ing seriously  when  he  declares  that  it  possessed  three 
walled  cities  and  two  hundred  and  four  villages.1  The 
Galileans  were  a  sturdy,  impulsive  people,  with  the 
virtues  of  all  colonists,  inured  to  war,  ready  for  resist- 
ance to  oppression,  and  although  thorough  Jews  in 
their  devotion  to  the  Law  and  the  temple,  without  the 
arid  fanaticism  of  the  Judeans.  In  many  particu- 
lars their  moral  life  was  more  healthy  than  that  of 
the  inhabitants  of  other  portions  of  Palestine,  and  as 
regards  marriage  public  sentiment  was  much  purer. 
Farmers  and  fishermen,  they  were  marked  by  consid- 
erable idealism,  for  it  is  worth  noticing  that  Galileans 
were  always  ready  to  accept  Messianic  claims.  No 
region  was  more  punctual  in  the  observance  of  the 
Sabbath  and  the  feasts.2  At  the  same  time  they 
were  much  more  than  the  Judeans  in  constant  rela- 
tions with  Graeco-Roinan  civilisation,  and  this  perhaps 
gave  them  a  freer  and  broader  life  than  that  of  their 
southern  brethren. 

Perea.  Grouped  with  Galilee  was  the  somewhat  larger 

region  of  Perea.  It  lay  on  the  east  of  Jordan  and  ex- 
tended from  the  Yarmuk  to  the  Arnon,  and  from  the 
regions  of  Gerasa,  Philadelphia,  and  the  desert 3  to  the 
Jordan.  Within  it,  though  politically  independent, 
were  many  of  the  cities  of  the  Decapolis,  but  this 
fact  did  not  prevent  its  being  considered  as  second  to 
Judea  alone  in  the  purity  of  its  Judaism.  Politically 
it  was  of  but  little  importance. 

1  Josephus,  Life,  9,  25,  45. 

2  See  Merrill,  Galilee  in  the  Time  of  Christ,  in  which  there  is 
a  strong  argument  against  Galileans  being  objects  of  contempt. 

8  War,  iii.  3  : 3. 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  ROMANS         151 

Herod  Antipas,  to  whom  these  prosperous  regions  Herod 
were  entrusted,  although  far  from  being  Herod's  n  lpas< 
equal,  had  more  of  his  father's  abilities  than  either  of 
his  two  brothers.  He  is  called  a  king  in  the  gospels  j1 
and,  although  the  title  is  not  strictly  correct,  it  proba- 
bly represents  popular  terminology.  As  in  the  case 
of  his  brother,  Philip,  we  are  left  in  doubt  as  to  the 
course  of  his  long  reign  (4  B.C. -39  A.D.),  Josephus 
telling  us  but  little  except  certain  gossipy  details. 
Like  his  father,  he  was  a  great  builder.  Sepphoris, 
the  most  important  city  of  Galilee,  which  had  suf- 
fered at  the  hands  of  the  robber  chief,  Judas,2  he 
once  more  surrounded  with  a  wall  and  made  again 
the  metropolis.  He  also  walled  the  city  of  Bethar- 
amptha,  in  which  the  palace  of  Herod  had  been 
destroyed  during  the  anarchy  following  his  death,3 
renaming  it  Livias,  or  Julias,  in  honour  of  the  em- 
peror's wife.4  He  seems  also  to  have  done  some 
similar  service  to  Cos  and  Delos,  as  tablets  in  his 
honour  have  been  found  in  those  islands.  But  the  His  reign, 
most  important  of  such  undertakings  was  his  building 
of  the  new  city  of  Tiberias,  on  the  western  bank  of 
the  Sea  of  Galilee,  not  far  from  the  celebrated  hot 

1  Mk.  6  : 14.     So  also  is  Archelaus,   Mat.  2  : 22.     But  his 
proper  title  is  used  in  Mat.  14  : 1 ;  Lk.  3  : 19.     Josephus,  in  a 
similar  colloquial  fashion,  speaks  of  Hyrcanus  II  as  king  (Ant. 
xv.  2:  2). 

2  Ant.  xvii.  10  :  5. 

8  War,  ii.  4  : 2,  although  Ant.  xvii.  10  : 6  reads  Amathus. 
The  city  probably  was  the  same  as  Beth-haram  (Josh.  13  : 27  ; 
Num.  32  :  36).  It  is  known  to  have  been  situated  east  of 
Jericho  beyond  Jordan,  but  its  site  has  not  yet  been  identified 
according  to  Schtirer  (Div.  II.  I.  141-143),  but  Smith  (Histori- 
cal Geography,  488  n.)  favours  Tell-er-Rameh.  It  is  known  to 
have  been  near  hot  springs. 

4  Livias  is  the  older  name,  since  Livia  was  admitted  into  the 
Julian  gens  only  by  the  will  of  Augustus. 


152      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Tiberias.  springs.  The  ruins  of  this  city,  which  yet  remain 
stretched  along  the  lake  and  the  highlands  above  it, 
show  but  imperfectly  its  original  importance.  To 
judge  from  the  order  of  events  as  recorded  by 
Josephus,  Herod  built  it  after  the  coming  of  Pilate, 
as  procurator  of  Judea  (26  A.D.),  naming  it  in  honour 
of  the  Emperor  Tiberius.  It  had  a  number  of  large 
buildings,  including  a  stadium ; l  a  royal  palace,  orna- 
mented with  the  golden  tile  and  figures  of  animals ; 
and  a  great  proseuche,  or  prayer  house,  of  the  Jews.2 
As  appears  from  its  ruins,  it  was  surrounded  by  walls, 
with  bastions  extending  into  the  lake,  and  had  col- 
onnaded streets.  In  organisation  it  was  thoroughly 
Greek,  having  a  council  of  six  hundred  members,  with 
an  archon  at  its  head,  and  a  Committee  of  Ten,  together 
with  other  officials.3  Its  population  was  mixed.  As 
it  was  partly  built  over  sepulchres,  it  was  at  first 
shunned  by  the  stricter  Jews;  but  many  were  com- 
pelled to  settle  in  it  by  Herod  Antipas,  and  others 
were  attracted  by  gifts  of  homes  and  lands,4  and  by 
the  time  of  the  great  war  it  was  evidently  filled  with 
fanatical  Jews.5  So  rapidly  did  it  grow,  and  so  much 
was  it  in  favour  with  Antipas,  that  he  made  it  his 
capital,  superior  even  to  Sepphoris,6  though  it  was  not 
as  large.7 

T<!terofr"  ^ke  character  of  Herod  Antipas  is  summed  up  by 

Antipas.         the  word  of  Jesus,  —  "  fox." 8     Singularly  enough,  we 

have  an  illustration  of  his  cunning.     At  one  time  he 

accompanied  Vitellius  on  an  embassy  to  Artabanus, 

king  of  Parthia.     The  meeting  was  held  in  a  rich 

1  War,  ii.  21  :  6  ;  iii.  10  : 10.  2  Josephus,  Life,  54. 

8  For  example,  hyparchs  and  a  superintendent  of  the  mar- 
kets. 

*  Ant.  xviii.  2  :  3. 

6  It  is  at  present  one  of  the  four  sacred  cities  of  the  Jews. 

e  Josephus,  Life,  9.  ?  War,  iii.  2:4.          8  Lk.  13  :  32. 


PALESTINE   UNDER    THE  ROMANS         153 

tent,  pitched  by  Herod  on  a  bridge  over  the  Eu- 
phrates. As  soon  as  the  desired  treaty  was  con- 
cluded, in  order  to  forestall  Vitellius  and  be  the  first 
to  report  the  good  news  to  Tiberius,  Herod  hurried 
off  a  full  report  to  the  emperor.  That  of  Vitellius 
was  therefore  unnecessary,  and  Herod  may  be  sup- 
posed to  have  gained  in  the  estimation  of  Tiberius. 
But  he  made  Vitellius  his  enemy,  as  he  was  to  dis- 
cover later  to  his  cost.1  The  same  trait  of  character 
appears  in  his  attitude  toward  the  Jews,  to  whom,  His  attitude 


much  more  than  in  the  case  of  Philip,  it  was  neces- 


sary  to  be  gracious.  Here  he  followed  closely  in  the 
footsteps  of  his  father,  balancing  his  friendship  for 
Rome  and  heathen  customs  by  his  attendance  upon 
the  feasts  at  Jerusalem.2  He  put  no  image  on  his 
coins,3  and  joined  in  a  protest  against  Pilate  for  hav- 
ing set  up  a  votive  shield  in  the  temple.4  As  far  as 
we  can  judge  from  the  material  at  our  disposal,  the 
Pharisees  never  regarded  him  with  the  same  suspicion 
and  hatred  they  had  shown  his  father  during  his  later 
years. 

It  was  characteristic  of  his  house  that  misfortune  Herodias. 
should  reach  him  through  his  domestic  relations. 
Antipas  had  been  married  to  the  daughter  of  the 
king  of  Arabia,  but  on  one  occasion,  when  in  Eome, 
he  had  fallen  in  love  with  Herodias,  the  wife  of  the 
Herod  who  lived  as  a  private  citizen  at  the  capital. 
The  fact  that  she  was  his  own  niece  caused  no  hesita- 
tion,5 and  they  had  arranged  to  be  married  as  soon  as 
Antipas  could  rid  himself  of  his  legal  wife.  In  some 

1  Ant.  xviii.  4:5.  2  Lk.  23  :  7-12. 

3  Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  118-122. 

4  So  Schtirer  (Div.  I.  II.  20  n.)  interprets,  and  doubtless 
correctly,  the  words  of  Philo,  Legation  to  Caius,  30. 

6  Such  a  marriage  was  not  even  formally  prohibited  after  the 
time  of  Claudius. 


154      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


way,  however,  this  wife  learned  of  his  plans  and  fled 
to  her  father,  who  thereupon  made  war  upon  his  faith- 
less son-in-law.  Aiitipas  was  defeated  through  treach- 
ery, and  complained  to  Tiberius,  who  ordered  Vitellius 
to  assist  him.  Tiberius  died,  however,  before  Vitel- 
lius had  fairly  begun  the  campaign,  and  the  expedition 
was  given  up.1  Herodias  had,  in  the  meantime,  di- 
vorced her  husband2  and  married  Antipas.  Later  she 
had  seen  her  brother,  Agrippa  I,  made  king  over  the 
Deposition  former  tetrarchy  of  Philip  (37  A.D.),  and  had  grown 
nJjrtJlf  ath  of  ambitious  for  her  new  husband  to  be  made  king  also.3 


Antipas. 


4.  The 
Decapolis. 


With  considerable  difficulty  she  persuaded  Antipas  to 
ask  the  emperor  Caligula  for  the  title,  but  he  met  with 
an  unexpected  reply.  The  preparations  made  for 
carrying  on  his  war  with  Arabia  gave  Agrippa  I  an 
opportunity  to  get  revenge  for  certain  quarrels,  and 
he  wrote  the  emperor  that  Antipas  was  preparing  to 
revolt.  As  the  unhappy  tetrarch  was  unable  to  deny 
that  his  arsenals  were  full  of  weapons,  Caligula  refused 
to  listen  to  explanations,  and  forthwith  banished  him 
to  Lyons,  whither  Herodias  accompanied  him.4 

4.  Interspersed  within  the  regions  of  Galilee,  Perea, 
and  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  was  the  Decapolis.  It 
would  be  incorrect  to  speak  of  it  as  a  region  or  dis- 
trict, for  it  was  nothing  more  politically  than  a  con- 
federation of  great  Graeco-Roman  cities.  Scythopolis, 
its  capital,  was  on  the  west  of  Jordan,  and  on  the 
various  roads  that  spread  out  like  the  sticks  of  a  fan 

1  Ant.  xviii.  5  :  1,  3.    The  Herod,  whom  Herod  Antipas  thus 
robbed  of  Herodias,  was  the  son  of  Mariamme  the  daughter  of 
the  high  priest.     It  is  possible  that  his  name  was  also  Philip 
(cf.  Mk.  6  :17),  though  that  would  make  two  Philips  among 
the  sons  of  Herod  —  a  supposition  difficult  to  accept,  although 
there  were  an  Antipas  and  an  Antipater.     The  daughter  of 
Herodias,  Salome,  married  Philip  the  tetrarch. 

2  Ant.  xviii.  6:4.  8  Ant.  xviii.  7  :  1. 
4  Ant.  xviii.  7  :  1,  2. 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  ROMANS         155 

from  the  fords  and  bridge  it  controlled,  were  Pella,  Its  compo- 
Gadara,  Hippos,  Dium,  Gerasa,  Philadelphia,  Kaphana,  E 
Kanatha,  and  at  one  time  Damascus.1  The  union  of 
these  ten  cities,  for  military  and  commercial  pur- 
poses, was  probably  brought  about  during  the  time  of 
Pompey,2  and  although  the  Eomans  gave  Hippos  and 
Gadara  to  Herod,  and  the  latter  city  seems  to  have 
joined  in  the  great  revolt  against  Koine,3  the  league 
maintained  itself  for  centuries,  and  at  the  time  of 
Ptolemy  embraced  eighteen  towns,  most  of  them  lying 
in  the  region  between  Damascus  and  the  Yarmuk. 
Each  of  these  cities  had  a  considerable  territory  at- 
tached to  it,  and  was  thus  an  example  of  the  city- 
state;  and  although  several  of  them  were  in  the 
midst  of  some  of  the  main  political  divisions  already 
described,  they  were  not  subject  to  either  procurator 
or  tetrarch.  For  this  reason  their  territories  were  not  Greek  cities 
continuous,  and  it  is  impossible  to  speak  of  a  "  region  of  Palestine 
of  the  Decapolis "  in  anything  more  than  a  popular 
sense.  But  it  should  be  further  noted  that  not 
merely  in  the  Decapolis  were  there  cities  clearly  dif- 
fering from  Jewish  towns  and  called  distinctly  Hellen- 
istic by  Josephus.4  All  over  the  region  west  of  the 

1  The  location  of  most  of  these  cities  is  unquestioned.     Scy- 
thopolis  is  now  the  miserable  village  of  Beisan ;  Pella,  Fahil ; 
Gadara,    Urn  keis  ;  Gerasa,  Jerash;  Philadelphia,   Ammana; 
Kanatha,  Kanawat.     Hippos  was  on  the  heights  above  the  Sea 
of  Galilee,  Dium  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Pella,  but  the 
site  of  Raphana  is  quite  lost.     Schtirer,  Div.  II.  I.  §  23  ;  Merrill, 
East  of  the  Jordan ;   Smith,   Historical   Geography,  ch.  28 ; 
Schumacher,  Abila,  Pella,  and  Northern  Ajlun;  Across  the 
Jordan. 

2  In  the  days  of  Alexander  Jannseus,  Scythopolis  and  Gadara 
are  said  to  have  been  cities  of  Coele-Syria  (Ant.  xiii.  13  : 2,  3). 
Gadara  is  also  spoken  of  as  a  village  (Ant.  xiii.  13 :  5),  a  fact 
perhaps  due  to  the  fortunes  of  war. 

3  War,  iii.  7  :  1 ;  iv.  7  : 3. 

4  Ant.  xvii.  11:4;   War,  ii.  6  :  3. 


156      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Mingling  of 
Jewish  and 
Greek  life. 


Superficial 
results  of 
this  min- 
gling in 
Palestine. 


Jordan  were  such,  cities  to  be  found.  Ptolemais,  Dora, 
Caesarea,  Apollonia,  Jamnia,  Azotus,  Ascalon,  Gaza, 
Anthedon,  Phasaelis,  and  others  crowded  along  the 
coast ;  Antipatris  and  Sebaste  lay  further  inland,  and 
Archelais,  in  the  Jordan  valley.  Each  city  had  some 
dependent  region,  and  in  all  of  them  it  is  probable 
were  Jewish  quarters,  as  in  Alexandria.  Several  like 
Csesarea,  Sebaste,  Tiberias,  and  Gaba,  had  been  built 
by  Jewish  rulers,  but  they  were  organised  after 
Greek  rather  than  Jewish  models,1  and  were  filled 
with  a  vigorous  anti-Semitism  that  needed  only  in- 
cipient anarchy  to  break  out  in  massacres,2  or  even, 
as  in  the  case  of  Csesarea,  to  occasion  revolution.3 

The  presence  of  this  energetic  heathenism  in  poli- 
tics and  social  life  produced  no  small  effect  upon 
Jewish  life  and  thought.  It  is  perhaps  true,  although 
outside  the  Sadducees  and  such  men  as  Josephus 
evidence  is  not  abundant,  that  the  new  Hellenism 
exercised  something  of  a  liberalising  influence.  Cer- 
tainly the  great  mass  of  the  Palestinian  Jews  spoke 
if  they  did  not  read  Greek,4  and  Hellenism  made 
itself  felt  in  other  directions,  notably  in  architecture, 
music,  commerce,  and  money.  Possibly,  even  in  litera- 
ture the  same  was  true  of  Palestine  as  of  the  Disper- 
sion, where  we  find  a  considerable  number  of  Jewish 
authors,  chiefly  historians  and  poets.5 

1  Kuhn,  II.  337,  8,  gives  as  other  examples,  Gaza  (Ant.  xiii. 
13  :3)  and  Dora  (Ant.  xix.  6:3).     The  most  exhaustive  dis- 
cussion of  Hellenism  in  Palestine  is  in  Schiirer,  3d  ed.,  §  22, 
§  23,  I. 

2  War,  ii.  18  : 1. 

3  Ant.  xx.  8:7-9;   War,  ii.  13  :  7  ;  14  :  4  ;  18  :  1. 

4  So  much  at  least  has  been  established  by  various  arguments, 
perhaps  best  presented  in  Roberts,  Greek,  the  Language  of  our 
Lord  and  His  Apostles. 

5  See  Susemihl,  Greschichte  des  griechischen  Litteratur  in  der 
Alexandrinerzeit ;  and  Schiirer,  3d  ed.,  §  33. 


PALESTINE   UNDER   THE  ROMANS         157 

But  it  was  among  those  Jews  who  lived  outside  Greek  influ. 
of  Palestine  that  the  positive  influences  of  Graeco-  Sspers^. 
Eoman  civilisation  are  mostly  seen.  From  the  time 
of  Antiochus  III,  indeed  from  that  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  the  Jews  had  been  regarded  as  especially  good 
colonists,  and  by  the  time  of  Augustus  there  was  no 
city  of  any  importance  in  the  empire  that  did  not 
possess  its  Jewish  quarter.  Sometimes,  as  at  Alexan- 
dria, such  colonies  were  very  large;  in  other  cities 
they  could  not  even  boast  a  place  of  prayer.  Often, 
even  if  not  generally,  these  "  Grecians"  as  they  were  ''Grecians" 
called,  had  some  sort  of  political  recognition,  being  "Hebrews." 
organised  into  wards  with  ethnarchs  of  their  own. 
They  had  their  synagogues,  their  rabbis,  their  Law, 
and  in  Alexandria,  it  will  be  recalled,  their  temple. 
They  were  as  devoted  to  Judaism  as  their  brethren  of 
Palestine,  the  "  Hebrews,"  and  their  annual  contribu- 
tions to  the  maintenance  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem 
were  enormous.  Once,  during  his  lifetime,  every  Jew 
hoped  to  attend  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  and 
wherever  he  might  live,  whenever  he  prayed  he 
turned  his  face  toward  the  Holy  City.1  Yet,  despite 
this  truly  Jewish  spirit,  the  members  of  the  Dispersion 
were  less  narrow  than  the  Palestinian  Jews,  and  at 
times  appear  anti-Pharisaical.  So  far  from  wishing 
to  set  limits  to  Judaism,  by  proselyting,  by  inter- 
preting their  sacred  books  according  to  the  spirit  of 
various  Greek  philosophies,  they  endeavoured  to  bring  Liberalism 
about  a  universal  Mosaism.  In  this  they  were  by  no  « Grecians." 
means  unsuccessful ;  but  in  the  effort  their  own  point 
of  view  was  changed,  and  without  any  weakening  of 
their  national  character  there  grew  up  among  the 

1  See,  for  complete  discussion,  Schurer,  Div.  II.  II.  §  31  (3d  ed. 
III.  1-135);  Friedlander,  Das  Judenthum  in  der  vorchrist- 
listlichen  griechischen  Welt;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche 
ZeitgescJiichte,  177-185 ;  Graetz,  II.  201-233. 


158      NEW   TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Dispersion  a  new  style  of  thinking  and  literature, 
in  which  Jewish  and  Greek  elements  are  strangely 
mixed. 

To  some  extent  these  influences  affecting  the  Dis- 
persion were  transmitted  by  its  members  to  the  Jews 
in  Palestine,  but  the  influence  exerted  by  the  Greek 
population  of  the  land  itself  was  undoubtedly  reac- 
Reaction-  tionary.  However  much  the  Palestinian  Jew  might 
H^ieiffsm  °f  ^ee^  ^e  innuence  °f  Alexandria,  the  sight  of  so  many 
in  Palestine,  thousand  men  and  women  indifferent  to  Jehovah  and 
the  Law;  of  idolatry  with  all  its  attendant  customs; 
of  contempt  for  the  Sabbath  and  Jewish  rites ;  even 
the  occasional  submission  of  individuals  to  circumci- 
sion or  some  less  pronounced  confession  of  proselytism ; 
conspired  to  make  the  Pharisee  and  his  devoted  dis- 
ciples the  more  zealous  for  their  faith.  Danger  of  a 
new  period  of  degeneration,  like  that  under  Menelaus 
and  Jason,  there  was  none.  Judaism  grew  sterner 
and  the  more  exclusive  under  the  pressure  of  Graeco- 
Eoman  life,  and  the  scribes  increased  the  number  of 
cases  in  which  any  intercourse  with  a  Gentile  would 
defile  a  Jew.  If  politically  the  heathen  possessed  the 
land,  religiously,  Judaism  under  the  inspiration  of 
the  Pharisees  and  Zealots  was  subject  to  no  master 
except  its  God,  and  awaited  in  faith  the  establish- 
ment of  His  kingdom  in  the  Holy  Land.  Jewish 
history  was  culminating  in  the  Messianic  hope. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE   MESSIANIC   HOPE   AND   JESUS    THE   MESSIAH1 

IT  is  thus  not  difficult  to  picture  the  outer  aspects  General 
of  Jewish  life  in  Palestine  during  the  first  half  cen-  jewteh\Tfe°f 
tury  of  our  era.  Even  if  we  disregard  the  cosmopoli- 
tan elements  suggested  by  the  Dispersion,  it  was 
no  primitive  society  that  filled  Judea  and  the  two 
tetrarchies.  Cities  crowded  upon  cities,  bringing  Jew 
and  Greek  together.  Every  nook  and  cranny  of  tilla- 
ble ground  bore  its  crop.  The  hills,  whose  thin  soil 
made  agriculture  impossible,  were  covered  with  flocks ; 
the  Sea  of  Galilee  was  alive  with  fishing  boats.  Polit- 
ical agitation  had  been  limited  to  "  robbers  "  and  the 
incipient  party  of  the  Zealots ;  while  the  tribes  on  the 
border,  though  occasionally  defeating  some  native 
prince,  did  not  venture  seriously  to  disturb  the  Roman 
peace. 

But  the  inner  life  of  the  people  is  not  so  easily 
grasped,  for  in  most  particulars  it  is  as  foreign  to  a 
Christian  civilisation  as  to  the  men  of  Borne.2  Two 
contradictory  dangers  especially  confront  the  student 

1  General  References :   Schtirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  II.  II.  154-187  ;  Wendt,  The  Teach- 
ing of  Jesus,  I.  33-89 ;  II.  122-183  ;  Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews, 
II.  140-174  ;  Edersheim,  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah, 
I.  160-179;  Sanday,  article  "  Jesus  Christ"  in  Hastings'  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Bible. 

2  See,  for  instance,  Horace,  Satires,  1 : 4, 142  sq. ;  Persius, 
Satires,  5  :  178-184  ;  Juvenal,  Satires,  3  : 12-16  ;   14  :  96-106  ; 
Josephus,  Ag.  Apion. 

159 


160      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Popular 
irreligion. 


Pietism. 


—  that  of  overestimating  and  that  of  underestimating 
the  religious  element  in  Jewish  life. 

On  the  one  hand,  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  the  peo- 
ple at  large  did  not  share  in  the  punctilious  religious 
life  of  the  Pharisees,  however  much  they  might  ad- 
mire it.  In  Palestine,  as  in  modern  lands,  the  propor- 
tion of  those  actively  engaged  in  religious  service  was 
undoubtedly  small.  The  fact  that  a  village  became  a 
town  when  once  it  possessed  ten  men  who  agreed  to 
be  regular  attendants  upon  the  synagogue  service,1  and 
the  additional  fact  that  later  it  became  customary  to 
pay  these  men  for  attending  service,  certainly  do  not 
heighten  one's  confidence  in  popular  piety.  It  would 
seem,  further,  as  if  one  synagogue  sufficed  for  a  town 
of  considerable  size.2  The  'dm  hardrets  (people  of  the 
land)  —  the  uneducated  masses  —  were  despised  by 
the  Pharisee,  not  so  much  because  of  their  poverty  as 
because  of  their  indifference  to  the  Law  and  its  disci- 
pline. They  were  sinners,3  whose  presence  defiled  the 
person  and  the  house  of  the  Pharisee.4 

Nor  is  it  improbable,  though  hardly  to  be  proved, 
that  there  were  those  Jews  who  were  filled  more  with 
the  quiet  spirit  of  the  Second  Isaiah  rather  than  with 
the  obtrusive  piety  of  Pharisaism,  —  persons  like  the 
aged  Simeon  and  Anna,  who  waited  for  the  consola- 
tion of  Israel,5  untroubled  by  and  perhaps  indifferent 
to  the  mass  of  rabbinical  laws. 

Yet  on  the  other  hand,  while  ultra  Judaism  can  be 
given  too  great  an  extent,  its  intensity  can  hardly  be 

1  Megilla  1  :  3. 

2  Apparently  Tiberias  had  only  one.      Compare  also  r^v 
o-vvayoyfiv  in  Mat.  12  :  9  ;  Lk.  7  :  5. 

8  See  Weber,  Lehre  des  Talmud,  122  sq. ;  Friedlander,  Zur 
Entstehungsgeschichte  des  Christenthums,  ch.  3. 

4  Quotations  from  the  Talmud  in  Schiirer,  Div.  II.  II.  8,  9. 

5  Lk.  2  : 25-38.     See  La  Grange  in  a  review  of  Schurer,  3d 
ed.,  in  JRevue  BiUique,  April,  1899. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS        161 

exaggerated.  Legally  centred  about  the  temple  and  influence  of 
the  high  priest,  its  real  soul  was  in  scribism.  Feasts,  the  Scribes- 
ritual,  sacrifices,  pilgrimages,  tithes,  Sabbaths,  and 
fasts,  —  these  were  all  alike  but  expressions  of  the 
profound  determination  to  keep  God's  law  as  ex- 
pounded in  the  synagogue.  Behind  the  mists  of  its 
apocalypses  quite  as  much  as  in  the  Mishna,  is  this 
spring  of  Jewish  life  always  to  be  seen,  and  complain 
though  the  people  might  of  Pharisees  who  were  but 
hypocrites,  and  of  teachers  who  laid  rather  than  re- 
moved burdens,  they  followed  them  by  the  thousands, 
if  need  be  to  death.1  The  legalistic  spirit  had  been 
too  great  an  element  in  Jewish  life,  and  its  represent- 
atives —  the  Chasidim,  the  "  Couples,"  the  rabbis,  the 
Pharisees,  the  Essenes  —  had  furnished  too  many 
heroes,  to  be  disregarded. 

Of  this  more  exacting  religious  life  it  is  not  possi- 
ble to  speak  in  detail.  Its  provisions  are  easily  to  be 
seen  in  the  gospels,  and  to  a  far  greater  degree  in  the 
Talmud.  For  scrupulosity,  unhesitating  logic,  con- 
scientiousness as  regards  the  moral  aspect  of  every 
act  in  life 2  it  stands  unparalleled.  It  is  easy  and  The  signifi- 
even  customary  to  see  absurdity  in  talmudic  discus- 
sions.  Absurdity  there  may  be,  but  a  sympathetic 
reader  will  also  feel  that  some  determination  as  to 
the  morality  of  every  trivial  detail  is  inevitable  if 
righteousness  is  to  be  gained  by  obedience  to  any  law. 
Thus  in  the  case  of  the  Sabbath,  the  minute  grouping 
of  all  sorts  of  forbidden  work  into  thirty-nine  classes 3 

1  The  Talmud  in  many  places,  e.g.  Sota,  20  a;  22  b,  is  as 
severe  upon  certain  classes  of  Pharisees  as  was  Jesus. 

2  For  example,  see  the  treatises  Berakoth  or  Chagigah,  the 
former  translated  by  Schwab  and  the  latter  by  Streane.     The 
Babylonian  Talmud  may  now  be  had  in  English,  translated  by 
Rodkinson. 

8  Shabbath,  13. 

M 


162      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Burdens  of 
Scribism. 


is  no  mere  play  of  scholastic  casuistry,  but,  if  once  the 
principle  of  legalism  be  granted,  is  a  legitimate  ex- 
position of  the  distinction  between  permissible  and  for- 
bidden actions.1  The  great  danger  to  which  scribism 
yielded  was  that  of  moral  pedantry  and  pride,  but 
this  was  involved  in  legalism  itself,  and  no  one  before 
Jesus  felt  the  danger  more  keenly  than  the  greater 
rabbis  themselves.  Despite  its  excesses,  Pharisaism 
succeeded  in  grinding  into  the  very  soul  of  Jewish  life, 
be  it  never  so  humble  or  degraded,  moral  distinctions 
as  regards  the  acts  of  the  individual,  such  as  Hel- 
lenism even  at  its  best  never  enforced. 

When,  however,  all  this  and  even  more  has  been 
granted,  it  is  abundantly  clear  that  Pharisaism  laid 
upon  the  people  burdens  impossible  to  be  borne. 
The  rabbis'  insistence  upon  tithes  and  other  religious 
charges  must  have  been  burdensome  in  the  extreme, 
but  even  more  deadening  must  have  been  their 
insistence  that  righteousness  was  impossible  except 
through  an  unbroken  observance  of  the  Mosaic  and 
the  oral  Law;  for  who  among  the  people  could  hope 
to  master  the  accumulation  of  rabbinical  teaching? 
In  proportion  as  legalism  grew  did  the  old  pro- 
phetic teaching  retreat,  and  life  became  less  a  direct 
service  of  a  loving  Jehovah  and  an  ever  increas- 
ingly fettered  and  hopeless  succession,  of  impossible 
tasks. 

Yet  legalism  could  not  kill  the  idealism  that  lay  in 
sianic  hope.  the  propiietical  side  of  Jewish  life.  Whether  learned 
or  ignorant,  gentle  or  fanatic,  the  Jew  never  lost  his 
belief  that  the  future  held  in  store  for  his  nation  a 
universal  empire,  a  kingdom  of  God.  Other  nations 
of  antiquity  had  not  been  without  ideals,  but  they  had 

1  A  collection  of  Sabbath  laws  is  given  in  Edersheim,  Life 
and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,  II.  56-58 ;  Schiirer,  Div.  II. 
II.  96-105. 


The  Mes- 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       163 

been  either  regretful  recollections  of  a  past  Golden  Not  a  hope 

Age  or  philosophical  and  impossible  Utopias  like  the  of  reform- 

republic  of  Plato.     The  Jew's  hope  was  something 

other.     His  prophets  spoke  God's  promises  through 

God's   inspiration.     Frequently,  it  is  true,  idealists 

like  Ezekiel  and  Zechariah  had  outlined  reforms  and 

a  new  Israel,  and  in  nearly  every  case  these  reforms 

had  been  incorporated  in  the  legislation  of  the  times. 

Occasionally,  also,  the  Pharisees  had  undertaken  to 

improve  irreligious  institutions.      But  the  hope   for 

the  Kingdom  was  not  merely  for  a  reformed  Judea. 

The  Kingdom  was  to  be  quite  new  and  quite  divine. 

God  himself  would  establish  it,  and  men  had  but  to 

join  it.     Indeed,  God  was  already  king,  with  angels 

as  subjects. 

As  something  definitely  expected,  the  kingdom  of  The  king- 
God  was  the  slow  outgrowth  of  the  successive  periods 
of  misfortune  which  characterised  the  entire  history 
of  the  Jewish  people.  Before  the  Persian  period  its 
faith  had  always  looked  to  a  regenerate  Israel  brought 
to  greatness  by  Jehovah.  Sometimes  this  faith  grew 
specific,  and  saw  with  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  a  misera- 
bly divided  people  reunited  under  the  house  of  David, 
but  oftener  with  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk,  Nahum,  Oba- 
diah,  Joel,  and  Malachi,  it  dealt  with  national  pros- 
perity without  naming  the  human  king.  The  exile 
deepened  the  nation's  consciousness  of  its  peculiar 
relations  with  Jehovah,  and  with  the  return  of  the 
most  devoted  of  its  members  there  came  a  deepening 
of  the  hope  that  Israel  would  become  a  world  power, 
directly  ruled  by  God.  But  it  was  short-lived.  The 
rise  of  the  priestly  class  and  of  that  practical  spirit 
which  finds  expression  in  literature  like  Ecclesiastes 
and  Ecclesiasticus,  left  little  room  for  the  idealism  of 
faith.  When,  however,  the  misery  of  religious  perse- 
cution awoke  the  Chasidim  to  a  fuller  realisation  of 


164      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  hope  of 
the  pious. 


The  Messi- 
anic hope 
peculiarly 
the  posses- 
sion of  the 
Pharisees. 


their  need  of  Jehovah  and  to  a  new  prophetic  era,  the 
Kingdom  became  again  an  object  of  religious  interest. 
In  this  revival  any  hope  of  a  specially  appointed  king 
—  a  Messiah  —  appeared  but  incidentally.  Daniel's 
Son  of  Man  was  even  less  an  individual  than  had  been 
the  Servant  of  Jehovah  —  nothing  more  than  a  type 
of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints  that  should  arise  from 
the  revolt  against  Syrian  oppression.  But  shortly 
afterward  there  came  also  an  increasing  belief  that 
none  but  an  Anointed  of  God  could  lead  the  Jewish 
people  into  their  great  future.  The  authors  of  the 
earlier  chapters  in  Enoch  and  the  Sibyttine  Oracles 
foresaw  a  man  as  well  as  a  kingdom,  and  it  has  already 
appeared  that  the  Pharisees,  after  their  bitter  disap- 
pointment at  the  course  taken  by  the  Asmonean  house, 
still  looked  for  the  "  Son  of  David,"  who  should  be  "  a 
just  king  taught  of  God."  l  In  this  descent  the  two 
rival  schools  of  Shammai  and  Hillel  agreed.  How- 
ever they  might  differ  as  to  the  character  of  the 
Messiah,  —  whether,  as  the  school  of  Shammai  would 
say,  he  was  to  sweep  away  the  Romans  by  the  breath 
of  his  mouth,  or,  as  the  followers  of  Hillel  believed,  he 
was  to  be  a  prince  of  peace,  —  in  either  case  he  was  to 
be  from  the  branch  of  David.  And  of  his  kingdom  of 
pious  Jews  there  was  to  be  no  end. 

In  its  essential  elements  this  progressive  conception 
was  practically  complete  by  the  first  century  of  our 
era.  The  rabbis  were,  it  is  true,  to  meet  their  Chris- 
tian opponents  and  the  fearful  disillusions  of  history 
with  new  teachings,  but  they  did  little  more  than 
elaborate  and  supplement  the  older  ideal  with  a  suffer- 
ing Messiah 2  and  a  profusion  of  eschatological  details. 

1  Pss.  of  Sol.  17. 

2  Dalmann,  Der  leidende  und  der  sterbende  Messias  ;  Stanton, 
The  Jewish  and  the  Christian  Messiah,  121-125 ;  Drummond, 
The  Jewish  Messiah,  359  sq. ;  Schiirer,  Div.  II.  II.  184-187  ; 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS        165 

Thus,  the  Messianic  hope,  both  as  regards  the  kingdom 
and  the  Christ,  was  born  of  national  misfortunes,  and 
was  cherished  by  those  who  dared  to  hope  and  trust 
Jehovah  for  a  brighter  future.  It  was  no  philosophy. 
It  was  a  part  of  a  national  spirit,  from  the  days  of 
Alexandra  growing  more  intense.  Above  all  was  it 
the  possession  of  the  Pharisees,  the  Essenes,  and  the 
Zealots.  Yet  it  can  hardly  have  been  limited  to  them. 
The  history  of  the  Messianic  movement  begun  by 
John,  as  well  as  the  occurrences  under  the  later  pro- 
curators, make  it  clear  that  the  masses  also  looked 
forward  to  a  new  and  divine  Jewish  kingdom  to  be 
established  by  some  one  especially  appointed  (anointed) 
by  God  for  the  purpose.  The  Sadducees  alone  seem 
not  to  have  shared  in  the  hope. 

It  is  naturally  difficult  to  reproduce  exactly  and  in  Literary  vs. 
detail  this  national  expectation  as  it  appeared  among  Messianism. 
so  many  groups  of  men.  The  literature  which  has 
survived  was  probably  that  of  but  one  or  two  schools 
of  religionists,  and  the  hope  of  the  masses  has  to  be 
reconstructed  from  incidental  statements  and  allusions. 
Speaking  generally,  however,  the  hope  took  two  ex- 
pressions, —  that  of  literature  and  that  of  popular  feel- 
ing. In  one  thing,  however,  both  agreed — the  kingdom 
of  God  was  to  be  a  kingdom  of  Jews.  All  other  people 
were  to  be  its  subjects  or  proselyted  citizens.  Of  a 
kingdom  in  any  other  sense  there  is  no  trace,  either  in 
Pharisaic  literature  or  in  popular  expectations,  for 
whenever  its  subjects  are  said  to  be  "the  righteous" 
or  "  the  sons  of  God," l  the  context  excludes  a  broader 
interpretation.  But  at  this  point  divergence  begins. 
There  were  those  who  expected  some  specially  ap- 

(3d  ed.)  II.  553-556;  Baldensperger,  Das  SelUsbewusstsein 
Jesu  (2d  ed.),  144  sq.  The  contrary  view  is  maintained  by 
Wiinsche,  Die  Leiden  des  Messias. 

1  Pss.  of  Sol.  17  :  28-30,  36,  46  ;  18  :  6. 


166     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  literary 
hope. 


The  coming 
of  Messiah. 


pointed  hero,  and  others  who  apparently  awaited  no 
individual  Messiah.  Some  expected  the  kingdom  to 
be  established  politically  in  the  world  as  they  knew 
it ;  others  in  despair  of  earthly  success  awaited  some 
fearful  cataclysm  that  should  presage  a  kingdom  of 
risen  saints. 

The  Messianic  hope,  as  it  appears  in  literature,  is 
varied,  if  not  inconsistent,  in  its  details.  If,  however, 
we  disregard  all  late  rabbinical  elements,  it  is  pos- 
sible to  present  it  in  its  main  outline.  /The  advent 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  was  not  only  to  be  heralded  by 
the  return  of  Elijah,1  and  possibly  other  prophets,  but 
it  was  to  be  preceded  by  a  period  of  fearful  suffering, 
especially  within  Jerusalem.2  Nature  itself  would 
abound  in  awful  portents,  the  moon  and  the  sun  turn- 
ing to  blood,  the  stars  falling  from  their  courses.  The 
Messiah  would  suddenly  appear  —  whence  no  one 
knew,  perhaps  from  Bethlehem,  perhaps  from  Jeru- 
salem, perhaps  —  though  this  is  probably  a  later  con- 
jecture—  from  Rome.  When  he  should  come  none 
knew,  although  the  rabbis  endeavoured  to  set  the  day 
by  ingenious  calculations.3  With  the  Messiah's  com- 

1  Mai.  4 :  5. 

2  The  eschatological  hope  is  best  set  forth  in  the  Assumption 
of  Moses,  the  Book  of  Jubilees,  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  the 
Book  of  Baruch,  and  4  Ezra.    The  two  former  of  these  books 
are  probably  from  about  the  time  of  Jesus,  while  the  others 
are  but  not  much  later  than  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.     On 
the  suffering  that  should  precede  the  Messianic  age,  see  Sibyl- 
line  Oracles,   iii.    795-807  ;  Dan.   12  : 1 ;   War,  vi.  5  : 3.     See 
also  Mat.  24  :  7-12,  21 ;  Mk.  13  :  8.     On  this  literature  in  gen- 
eral see  Deane,  Pseudepigrapha ;  Thomson,  Books  which  In- 
fluenced our  Lord  and  His  Apostles;  Schlirer,  Div.  II.   III. 
44-141 ;  Drummond,  The  Jewish  Messiah  ;  Commentaries  on  the 
Apocrypha  by  Wace,  Bissell,  Kautzsch.  In  particular  see  Charles, 
the  Assumption  of  Moses  and  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch. 

3  The  resurrection  was  not  expected  before  the  foreordained 
numbers  of  mankind  had  been  filled.     Apocalypse  of  Baruch, 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       167 

ing  would  begin  a  last  fierce  war  and  judgment,  in 
which  the  enemies  of  the  Jews  and  all  the  evil  angels 
would  be  destroyed,  God  himself  being  the  judge.1 

With  this  judgment  "this   age"  would   end,   and 
"  the  age  to  come  "  would  begin.     The  new  kingdom 
would  be  set  up  in  Jerusalem,  which  itself  would  be 
renovated  by  the  Messiah,2  if,  indeed,  a  new  Jerusa- 
lem did  not  descend  from  heaven.3    Peace  would  then  The  resur« 
spread  over  the  world,4  the  Dispersion  would  be  re-  rectlon- 
called,5  and  the  righteous  dead  be  raised  from  their 
graves  to  join   the   kingdom   centred   in,  but  by  no 
means  limited  to,  Palestine.      God  then  would  take 
over  the  kingdom,  now  as  holy  as  glorious.6 

The  character  of  the  Messiah  himself  as  expected  by  Tlie  char- 
the  Pharisees  is  somewhat  indistinct,  because  of  no  Messiah, 
attempt  on  their   part  to  present  it  systematically. 

23  : 4,  5.  See  4  Ezra,  4  :  36  (cf.  Rev.  6  : 11).  The  belief  that 
the  Messiah  could  not  come  until  the  nation  had  repented  and 
fulfilled  the  Law,  at  least  until  it  had  kept  two  Sabbaths  per- 
fectly, is  not  certainly  as  early  as  the  first  century  (Weber, 
Lehre  des  Talmud,  333,  334). 

1  Assumption  of  Moses,  10  : 1-10.     So,  too,  in  Enoch,  90  : 18, 
19,  but  the  Son  of  Man  also  is  the  judge  according  to  Enoch, 
45  :  3  ;  55  : 4  ;  69  :  27  ;  cf .  Jn.  5  :  27. 

2  Ps.  of  Sol.  17  :25,  33. 

3  Enoch,  53  :  6  ;  90  :  28,  29  ;  4  Ezra,  7  :  26  ;  Apocalypse  of  Ba- 
ruch,  32  : 4  ;  cf.  Rev.  3  : 12  ;  21  : 2,  10  ;  Heb.  12  :  22  ;  Gal.  4  :  26. 

4  Sibylline  Oracles,  iii.  371-380,  620-623,  743-760 ;  Apoca- 
lypse of  Baruch,  19  :  5-8  ;  Philo,  Rewards  and  Punishments, 
15-20. 

5  Ps.  of  Sol.  11  :  3,  4  ;  4  Ezra,  13  :  39-47. 

6  By  some  Pharisees  the  Messianic  reign  was  regarded  as  but 
temporary.     Such  prophets  probably  expected  a  second  judg- 
ment to  be  preceded  by  a  general  resurrection  and  followed  by 
everlasting  punishment  for   sinners,  a.nd  blessedness  for  the 
righteous.     At  the  same  time  some  rabbis  anticipated  a  sort  of 
purgatory  in  which  sin  might  be  removed.     (Quotations  in 
Weber,  Lehre  des  Talmud,  374,  375 ;  Enoch,  67  : 7-13,  speaks 
similarly  of  angels.) 


168     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Titles  of 
Messiah. 


Popular 

Messianic 

hopes. 


With  the  Word  of  Alexandrine  Stoicism  and  the  Memra 
of  rabbinism,  the  Messiah  had  little  in  common.  He 
was,  it  will  be  recalled,  rather  an  ideal  king  who  should 
be  God's  agent  in  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom. 
This  ideal  was  never  so  elaborated  as  to  predicate 
divine  qualities  of  the  Messiah.  Once  or  twice  he  was 
ascribed  preexistence,1  but  so  far  as  the  earlier  rabbin- 
ism  is  concerned  this  was  probably  only  ideal  in  the 
purpose  of  God,  rather  than  personal.2  His  titles, 
"  Son  of  Man/7  3  and  "  Son  of  God/' 4  are  seldom  used, 
and  his  true  character  is  to  be  seen  in  such  titles  as 
"King,"  "Anointed,"  "Son  of  David."  He  was,  in 
fact,  most  likely  thought  of  as  a  human  king,  espe- 
cially chosen  and  fitted  by  God  for  establishing  his 
kingdom,  and  as  one  who  should  after  its  consumma- 
tion surrender  it  to  his  Lord. 

If  this  be  the  literary  and  most  refined  Messianic 
hope,  and  especially  if,  as  seems  altogether  probable, 
the  hopes  set  forth  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  are  those  only 
of  a  narrow  if  not  esoteric  group,  it  is  not  difficult  to 
imagine,  even  without  the  few  hints  of  the  gospels 
and  Josephus,  what  the  hope  was  among  the  masses. 
They,  too,  expected  a  new  kingdom  for  Israel,  but 
without  waiting  upon  some  conquest  of  righteousness. 
Repentance  was  but  a  means  of  escaping  the  punish- 
ment of  the  Judge.  The  Anointed  of  God  would  be 
no  hero  to  overcome  with  "  the  word  of  his  mouth," 
but  a  warrior  under  whose  leadership  the  Jews  would 

1  Enoch,  48  :  3  ;  4  Ezra,  13  :  32 ;  cf .  Targuin,  Jonathan  upon 
Zech.  4:7,    "The  Messiah  whose  name  was  named  before 
eternity." 

2  Weber,  Lehre  des  Talmud,  339,  340. 

8  Only  in  Enoch,  46  : 1-4  ;  48  : 2  ;  62  :  5,  7,  9,  14  ;  63  : 11 ; 
69  :  26,  27  ;  70  : 1.  See  Charles,  Book  of  Enoch,  128  f.  and 
Ap.  B. 

4  Enoch,  105  :  2  ;  4  Ezra,  7  :  28,  29  ;  13  :  32,  37,  52  ;  14  :  9. 
This  does  not  imply  his  divine  character. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       169 

surely  "  tread  upon  the  neck  of  the  eagle."  l  Rabbini- 
cal refinements,  panaceas  of  eschatological  visions,  were 
thrust  one  side.  The  Christ  would  work  miracles,2  but 
only  when  he  had  summoned  Jews  to  arms.3 

It  is   precisely   this    aspect    of   the   religious   de-  Jesus  as  a 
velopment  of  Judaism  that  offers  the  best  point  of 


view  for  understanding  the  movement  inaugurated  by  Messianic 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  To  discuss  his  work  as  a  teacher 
of  personal  religion  would  carry  us  too  far  from  our 
present  study  of  the  history  of  the  Jews  as  a  nation  ; 
but  as  a  Jew  transforming  Judaism  he  cannot  be  over- 
looked. Like  the  Pharisees,  Jesus  found  in  the  king- 
dom of  God  his  highest  ideal,  but  unlike  them  he 
deliberately  refused  to  see  in  it  anything  political  or 
ethnic  ;  and  while  the  Pharisees  taught  men  to  await 
it,  Jesus  urged  men  to  join  it  as  something  already 
among  them.  Nor  was  it  something  outside  the  sphere 
of  ethics.  Far  otherwise,  it  presupposed  moral  strenu- 
ousness,  for  one  must  strive  to  enter  it.  And,  above  all, 
he  set  himself  forth  as  its  founder  —  the  Messiah. 

It  is  very  little  that  we  know  of  Jesus  outside  his 
founding  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  He  was  a  Gali- 
lean, though  born  in  Bethlehem  (6-5  B.C.).  He  was 

1  Assumption  of  Moses,  10  :  8.  2  Cf.  Jn.  7  :  31. 

8  The  Messianic  hope  among  the  Samaritans  cannot  be 
accurately  described  because  of  unreliable  data.  According  to 
a  hymn  of  the  fourteenth  century  (1376),  and  even  later  state- 
ments (1672),  they  expected  the  Messiah  to  be  a  sort  of  prophet 
(Hashab,  converter).  This  agrees  remarkably  with  the  words 
of  the  Samaritan  woman,  Jn.  4  :  25,  as  well  as  the  answer  of 
Jesus  (v.  26)  ,  but  it  is  hardly  safe  to  picture  the  details  of  the 
hope.  See  Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels, 
ch.  2,  Note  ii  ;  Lightfoot,  Biblical  Essays,  154  sq.  ;  Cowley, 
uThe  Samaritan  Doctrine  of  the  Messiah,"  Expositor,  March, 
1895.  A  full  list  of  passages  interpreted  Messianically  by  the 
rabbis  is  given  in  Edersheim,  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the 
Messiah,  II.  710-741. 


170     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


The  early 
life  of  Jesus. 


John  the 
Baptist  in- 
augurates a 
Messianic 
movement. 


of  Davidic  descent/  although  he  never  appealed  to 
this  fact  in  the  endeavour  to  win  followers,  and  dis- 
tinctly repudiated  the  rabbinical  notions  which  had 
gathered  about  the  term  "  Son  of  David." 2  He 
learned  his  father's  trade  of  carpentry  and  probably 
followed  it  until  he  began  his  public  work.  It  is 
possible  that  before  his  public  life  he  had  won  some 
local  reputation  as  a  pious  and  comparatively  edu- 
cated man,3  who,  superficially  judged,  was  in  sympa- 
thy with  Pharisaism  of  the  less  rigorous  type.  Of 
his  inner  life  during  these  years  of  obscurity  we  can 
infer  little  except  that  he  was  an  independent  and 
profound  student  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  a  reader 
of  other  Jewish  literature,4  and  above  all  a  man  in 
a  unique  and  utterly  unparalleled  degree  at  one  with 
a  God  whom  from  his  boyhood  he  knew  as  Father. 

Both  from  his  surroundings  and  his  own  nature,  he 
must  have  been  increasingly  concerned  with  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Yet  the  first  steps  in  the  actual  Messi- 
anic movement  which  bears  his  name  were  not  taken 
by  him.  In  fact,  up  to  the  very  beginning  of  his  pub- 
lic career  he  appears  to  have  had  no  suspicion  that  his 
sense  of  divine  sonship  would  necessitate  his  abandon- 
ment of  his  quiet  life  in  Nazareth.  His  awakening 
was  occasioned  by  John  the  Baptist  —  a  product  of  the 
extreme  ascetic  religious  spirit  that  always  existed 
sporadically  among  the  Jews,  and  altogether  a  different 
man  from  Jesus.  In  the  garb  of  the  poorest  fellah  John 
appeared  suddenly  among  the  effeminate  inhabitants 

1  Kom.  1  :  3  ;  cf.  Mat.  1  : 1-16  ;  Lk.  3  :  23-38. 

2  Mk.  12  :  35-37. 

8  For  there  is  no  record  of  any  objection  to  his  being  called 
rabbi,  and  he  evidently  was  accustomed  to  reading  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  at  the  synagogues.  Mk.  6  : 1-6  ;  Lk.  4  : 16-30. 

4  See  Charles,  Book  of  Enoch,  41-53 ;  Adamson,  The  Mind 
in  Christ,  ch.  6 ;  Thomson,  Books  which  Influenced  our  Lord 
and  His  Apostles,  11  sq.  and  passim. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       171 

of  the  Jordan  valley  near  Jericho,  and  gave  his  star- 
tling message.  The  day  of  Jehovah  was  at  hand !  The 
Christ  was  about  to  appear  to  sit  in  judgment  upon 
all  men !  There  was  no  time  to  be  lost,  and  he  sum- 
moned men  and  women  to  be  bathed  in  the  Jordan 
as  evidence  of  their  abandoning  their  sins  in  hopes 
of  avoiding  the  punishment  of  the  approaching  Judge. 
His  conceptions  of  the  Kingdom  differed  from  those  of 
the  Pharisees  and  Essenes,  in  that  with  him  Jewish 
birth  counted  but  little ; 1  but  his  words  ran  like  wild- 
fire among  a  people  eager  to  believe  that  their  hopes 
were  to  be  fulfilled.  Penitents  came  to  him  in  crowds 
from  Judea  and  Perea.  As  he  worked  northward  the 
news  of  his  work  reached  Nazareth,  and  Jesus,  recog- 
nising in  him  a  messenger  of  God,  went  to  be  baptized. 

In  the  very  water  his  duty  burst  upon  him  like  a  Jesus  knows 
voice  from  God.     He  was  to  be  the  Messiah  whom  ^^^lf  to 
John,  in  ignorance,  had  foretold.     He,  and  he  alone,   Christ, 
must  found  the  kingdom  of  God. 

In  one  way,  the  task  was  easy.  He  had  but  to 
accommodate  himself  to  the  hope  of  his  people,  win 
over  Pharisee  and  populace  by  an  appeal  to  national 
pride,  organise  a  state.  That  such  a  plan  would 
have  succeeded  is  made  almost  certain  by  the  sub- 
sequent career  of  Mohamet  in  almost  the  same  region 
and  among  a  people  inferior  to  the  Jews.  But  over 
against  this  current  ideal  of  the  kingdom  lay  the  ideal 
of  Jesus  himself:2  of  a  new  social  order,  in  which  God 

1  Mat.  3  :  9. 

2  See  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  1. 175  sq.,  364-403  ;  Bruce, 
The    Kingdom  of  God;    Candlish,    The    Kingdom  of   G-od; 
Bousset,  Jesu  Predigt  in  ihren   Gegensatz  zum  Judenthum; 
Schwartzkopff,    The  Prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ,  181  sq.  ;  Bal- 
densperger,  Das  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,  chs.  3,  5 ;    Stevens, 
Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  27-41.    See  also  monographs 
by  Issel,  Schmoller,  J.  Weiss,  Liitgert,  Titius,  Schnedermann, 
Krop.    A  discussion  of  various  definitions  is  given  by  Kostlin, 


172     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

His  idea  of  should  reign,  and  men  should  do  his  will ;  in  which 
men  should  be  sons  of  God,  and,  therefore,  brothers 
of  each  other.  And  he  chose  to  establish  this  ethical 
and  religious  fraternity,  though  he  saw  that  the  at- 
tempt, so  similar  to  those  of  the  prophets  of  his  race, 
would  almost  certainly  bring  him  to  their  fate.  Over 
against  conquest  and  world-wide  supremacy  he  chose 
love  and  self-sacrifice. 

His  method  was  at  once  simple  and  farsighted. 
From  the  start,  the  movement  was  Messianic,  but 
Jesus  was  more  concerned  to  show  that  the  Messiah 
was  such  as  he,  than  to  show  that  he  was  the  Messiah. 
In  other  words,  like  a  prophet,  rather  than  a  rabbi,  he 
used  current  hopes  in  the  service  of  ethics  and  relig- 
The  found-  ion.1  His  effort  was  also  social.  Thanks  to  John, 
fraternity.  wno  believed  him  to  be  the  Christ,  Jesus  immedi- 
ately found  himself  the  centre  of  a  little  group  of 
common  people  —  'am  hadrets  —  who  accepted  him 
as  the  Christ  of  popular  expectation.  Perhaps  be- 
cause of  this  fact,  the  first  few  months  of  the  new 
movement  were  filled  with  work  similar  to  that  of 
John,  and  men  were  summoned  to  repentance  and 

**  Die  Idee  des  Reiches  Gottes  "  in  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1892, 
pt.  iii.  1,  and  in  Mathews,  Social  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ch.  3. 

1  Even  without  appeal  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  it  is  necessary 
to  hold  that  the  Twelve  thought  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ  before 
the  scene  at  Caesarea  Philippi.  The  mere  fact  that  the  four 
so  readily  followed  him  (Mk.  1  : 16-20)  implies  a  previous  ac- 
quaintance in  which  Jesus  had  been  seen  to  be  more  than  an 
ordinary  rabbi.  More  clearly  his  words  at  Nazareth  (Lk. 
4  : 16-30)  and  his  reply  to  the  messengers  of  John  (Mat.  11 : 2-6  ; 
Lk.  7  : 18-23)  are  unintelligible,  unless  they  represent  Messi- 
anic claims.  The  significance  of  Csesarea  Philippi  is  not  that 
of  a  new  faith,  but  of  an  old  faith  held  despite  the  difficulty 
of  accepting  such  a  person  as  Jesus  as  the  Christ.  This  is 
strengthened  by  the  probability  that  the  confession  of  Peter, 
Jn.  6  : 66-69,  is  but  another  account  of  the  events  in  Mk. 
8 : 27-30. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       173 

baptism.     These  months  were   spent   in  Judea,  but 
proximity  to  John  exposed  each  Messianic  movement 
to   danger   and   Jesus   returned  to   Galilee.     There,  His  life  in 
when  John  had  been  imprisoned,  he  began  his  great  Galilee* 
work  of  evangelisation,  philanthropy,  and  the  educa- 
tion of  his  closest  friends,  and  it  is  of  his  life  among 
the  Galileans  that  we  know  most  from  the  gospels.1 

Of  his  teaching  during  these  months,  we  cannot 
speak.  It  is  enough  to  say  that,  as  the  founder  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  he  did  not  commit  himself  to 
either  Pharisaic  or  popular  Messianic  hopes.  For  a 
considerable  time  he  was  less  interested  in  being 
accepted  as  the  Messiah  than  in  showing  men  the 
requisites  of  membership  in  the  Messianic  kingdom. 
He  seldom,  if  ever,  used  the  term  "Christ"  with 
reference  to  himself,  and  commonly  spoke  of  himself  "The  Son 
as  "the  Son  of  Man,"  which,  though  Messianic  in  of  Man>" 

1  The  details  of  the  chronology  of  the  life  of  Jesus  are  not 
yet  finally  fixed,  although  the  present  tendency  seems  to  be 
toward  29  A.D.  as  the  date  of  his  death.  (See  e.g.  the  articles 
in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  "  Chronology  of  the  New 
Testament"  by  Turner,  and  "Jesus  Christ"  by  Sanday.  See 
also  Wright,  Some  New  Testament  Problems,  ch.  14.)  Nor  is 
the  length  of  his  public  ministry  altogether  determined.  The 
quadripaschal  view  is  largely  abandoned,  with  the  result  that 
the  public  ministry  is  made  two  years  and  several  months  in 
length.  But  there  is  a  fair  question  whether  the  criticism  of 
the  gospels  does  not  reduce  this  by  a  year.  As  the  case  stands 
to-day,  the  first  year  of  the  public  ministry  depends  almost 
entirely  upon  (a)  the  belief  that  John  rather  than  the  synop- 
tists  has  given  the  proper  chronological  position  to  the  clean- 
sing of  the  temple,  and  (6)  the  acceptance  of  the  order  of 
Mk.  2  : 1-3  : 6  as  strictly  chronological.  Each  of  these  posi- 
tions is  open  to  weighty  objections.  Were  it  not  for  the 
"  forty-six  years"  of  Jn.  2  :  20,  the  conclusion  would  be  toler- 
ably secure  that  the  public  life  of  Jesus  included  but  two  Pass- 
overs, and  lasted  about  sixteen  or  eighteen  months.  The 
general  course  of  his  public  life,  however,  is  practically  the 
same  whatever  view  is  held  as  to  its  length. 


174     NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Enoch,  apparently  had  little  or  no  such  content  in  the 
thoughts  of  the  people  at  large.    For  this  very  reason, 
it  was  a  most  serviceable  term.     In  its  original  force 
Jesus  as  the    in  Daniel  it  presented  a  man  as  the  type  of  a  "  king- 
kingdom  of    dom  of  the  saints,"  as  beasts  were  the  types  of  other 
G°d.  kingdoms.    By  using  it,  Jesus  could  clearly  and  with- 

out precipitating  any  disturbance,  set  forth  a  distinct 
ideal  of  membership  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  the 
word  would  suggest  to  every  Jew  the  simple  typology 
of  Daniel,  and  Jesus  would  thus  stand  as  the  type  of 
the  kingdom  he  announced.1  His  character  should  be 
that  of  its  members.  For,  as  the  Messiah,  he  was 
something  more  than  a  teacher  —  he  was  a  Life.  It 
was  his  consciousness  of  divine  sonship  that  had  led 
him  to  undertake  the  Messianic  work  of  establishing 
God's  kingdom,  and  it  was  the  same  consciousness 
that  gave  him  his  power  of  inspiring  a  few  men  with 
an  undying  loyalty  to  himself.  As  a  teacher  of 
ethics,  he  could  do  little  more  than  restate,  though 

1  Dan.  7  : 13.  Thus  by  u  Son  of  Man"  Jesus  did  not  emphasize 
his  humility,  or  his  human  weakness,  or  his  generic  humanity. 
Only  in  Enoch  was  it  Messianic  (e.g.  48: 2;  69 :  27;  62 :  6  ;  cf.  168, 
n.  3).  See  Jn.  12  :  34.  That  the  members  of  the  kingdom  were 
to  become  like  Messiah  was  not  a  new  thought,  but  is  implied  in 
Enoch,  90  :  37,  38,  and  less  clearly  in  Ps.  of  Sol.  17  :  27,  30,  36, 41. 
See  further  Baldensperger,  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,  ch.  7  ;  Lietz- 
mann,  Der  Menschensohn,  42-48  ;  Krop,  La  Pensee  de  Jesus  sur 
le  Eoyaume  de  Dieu,  esp.  118-132  ;  Burton,  "  The  Son  of  Man," 
Expositor,  October,  1896  ;  Dalman,  Die  Worte  Jesu,  I. ;  Stevens, 
Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  41-53.  The  view  of  Well- 
hausen,  (Israelitische  und  judische  Geschichte,  312  n.  See  also 
Meyer,  Jesu  Mutter spr ache,  140  sq.;  Schmidt  in  Journal  of 
Society  for  Biblical  Literature  and  Exegesis,  xv.  36-53  ;  Holtz- 
mann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I.  256  sq.)  that  uSon  of 
Man"  means  simply  "man,"  its  Messianic  content  being  due 
to  a  mistranslation  of  the  Aramaic  bar  nasha  by  early  Christian 
writers,  is  doubtless  correct  philologically,  but  it  does  not  affect 
the  view  here  given  as  to  the  peculiar  usage  of  the  term  by  Jesus. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       175 

with  astonishing  simplicity  and  force,  the  great  prin- 
ciples already  taught  by  the  Hebrew  prophets ;  but  as 
the  Messiah,  he  founded  the  kingdom  of  God,  by  com- 
pelling men  who  could  not  understand  him  or  his 
ideals  to  love  him,  and  grow  to  be  like  him,  the  ideal 
of  the  kingdom. 

From  the  beginning  of  his  preaching  in  Galilee,  Jesus  in 
Jesus  was  a  popular  hero.  His  sweetness  of  temper,  a  l  ee* 
the  authority  and  attractiveness  in  his  teaching,  his 
undisguised  sympathy  with  the  despised  masses,  his 
superiority  to  his  religious  superiors,  his  philanthropy, 
the  very  mystery  in  his  Messianic  character  —  all 
brought  thousands  to  him.  But  he  did  not  exploit  his 
popularity.  He  once  retired  to  the  hills  when  the 
crowds  were  on  the  point  of  making  him  a  leader  of 
revolution,1  and  repeatedly  he  endeavoured  to  escape 
their  presence.  Nor  did  he  attempt  to  win  everybody 
to  himself.  In  his  teachings  he  seems  occasionally  to 
magnify  difficulties  that  he  might  dissuade  any  half- 
hearted person  from  joining  the  group  of  his  imme- 
diate friends. 

To  the  members  of  this  never  very  numerous,  though 
by  no  means  small,  circle2  he  showed  his  ideals  as 
rapidly  as  they  could  appreciate  them,  and  thus  de- 
veloped their  better  natures  without  destroying  pre- 
maturely their  old  beliefs.  By  degrees  one  thing 
grew  true  of  them  all  —  they  grew  less  devoted  to  His  fol- 
Pharisaic  supremacy.  Jesus,  it  is  true,  was  always  ^ntf- 
loyal  to  the  pre-Pharisaic  faith  of  his  people,  the  saic. 
temple  and  its  services,  the  Law  in  its  broader  teach- 
ings, and  even  to  professional  teachers.3  But  with 
Pharisaism  as  a  system  he  broke  entirely.  To  him 
righteousness  was  an  affair  of  motive  and  inner  char- 

1  Jn.  6  : 15. 

2  See,  e.g.  Acts  1  : 15  ;  1  Cor.  15  : 6. 
8  Mt.  23  ;  2,  3. 


176      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Consequent 
danger  to 
religious 
stability. 


The  begin- 
ning of  op- 
position to 
Jesus. 


acter,  and  religion  as  he  knew  it  and  lived  it  was  not 
a  keeping  of  traditional  laws,  but  a  life  with  God,  and 
his  opposition  to  the  heartless  pedantry  that  so  often 
was  the  ideal  of  Pharisaism  grew  intense.1  By  de- 
grees his  disciples  came  to  take  the  same  position,  and 
almost  before  they  could  appreciate  it,  the  Pharisees 
found  themselves  confronting  a  popular  movement, 
which,  if  successful,  would  end  fasting  as  a  religious 
duty,  make  the  Sabbath  observance  vastly  less  strict, 
abolish  the  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean 
things  altogether,  make  stricter  all  teachings  as  to 
marriage  and  divorce,  lessen  the  influence  of  the  oral 
Law,  give  new  importance  to  the  masses  and  less  to 
the  professional  classes,  destroy  the  ultra-national 
character  of  the  expected  kingdom,  —  a  movement 
which,  in  a  word,  would  undo  most  of  the  political 
and  social  development  which  had  made  them  the 
popular  leaders.  That  a  struggle  should  have  ensued 
was  inevitable.  The  very  foundations  of  society 
seemed  threatened. 

The  attack  came  from  the  rabbis  of  Jerusalem,  and 
was  not  upon  the  new  fraternity,  but  upon  Jesus  him- 
self. It  passed  rapidly  through  the  several  stages  of 
suspicion,  hatred,  and  conspiracy.  As  long  as  Jesus 
was  in  Galilee,  it  is  true,  his  popularity  among  the  'dm 
hadrets,  as  well  as  the  distance  from  Jerusalem,  kept 
his  opponents  from  inflicting  upon  him  the  punishment 
due  to  heretics,  but  they  hindered  his  public  work  in 
the  country,  and  at  last  forced  him  to  leave  Galilee 
altogether. 

Before  they  succeeded  even  this  far,  however,  Jesus 
had  a  few  months  —  or  rather,  perhaps,  weeks — in 
which  he  conducted  an  indefatigable  canvass  of 
Galilee.  His  kingdom  was  not  to  be  an  institution, 


k.  7:1-13;  8:11-15. 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS        177 

but  a  fraternity,  as  broad  as  human  life.     Choosing 
twelve  men  from  the  many  who  believed  in  him, —  "The 
a  belief  that  was  only  imperfect  in  his  Messiahship,  Twelve«" 
but  complete  in  his  ability  to  teach  truth  and  work 
cures, — he  sent  them  out  to  announce  the  coming 
kingdom  to  villages  he  could  not  himself  visit.     But 
their  efforts  were  apparently  not  often  repeated,  and 
he  preferred  to  keep  them  with  him  that  their  ideas 
as  to  him  and  his  fraternity  might  be  clarified. 

When  at  last  he  was  forced  to  leave  Galilee  these 
men  went  with  him,  first  into  the  neighbouring  regions 
of  Tyre  and  Sidon,  then  into  the  heathen  Decapolis, 
and  finally  into  Perea  and  Judea.  It  was  at  the 
beginning  of  these  few  months  of  wanderings,  half  as 
fugitives  and  half  as  teachers,  that  Jesus  brought  his 
twelve  followers  to  see  clearly  that  despite  all  the  The  disci- 
opposition  of  the  Pharisees  and  the  startling  differ-  that  Jesus 
ences  between  his  life  and  their  own  expectations,  he  is  the  Christ 
was  yet  the  Christ.  From  the  moment  of  their  con- 
fession of  a  faith  which  if  incomplete  was  larger ]  and 
more  intelligent  than  when  they  had  first  joined  him, 
he  unfolded  to  them  the  suffering  he  saw  must  be  the 
outcome  of  the  opposition  of  their  religious  leaders, 
and  for  which  as  a  final  test  their  faith  must  be  pre- 
pared. He  himself  did  not  waver  in  either  purpose 
or  teaching,  and  when  in  the  spring  of  29  he  and  the 
twelve  other  young  men  went  up  to  the  Passover,  it 
was  with  the  purpose  of  publicly  announcing  himself 
as  the  Christ.2  With  this  end  in  view,  during  the  last 

1  Mk.  8  :  27-30. 

2  That  Jesus  clearly  foresaw  his  death  appears  from  Mk. 
8  :  31 ;  9  :  31 ;  10  :  32-34.     Cf.  Lk.  24  :  25  sq.,  44-46  ;  Jn.  10  : 11, 
17  sq.     See   Schwartzkopff,   The  Prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ ; 
Baldensperger,   Das   Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,   ch.   6 ;    Wendt, 
Teaching  of  Jesus,  II.  218-264;  Fairbairn,  "Christ's  Attitude 
toward  His  own  Death,"  Expositor,  1896,  1897. 

N 


178      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Jesu?  fn 
Jerusalem. 


His  arrest. 


few  days  in  his  life,  he  performed  a  number  of  acts 
expected  of  the  Messiah.  Thus,  he  rode  into  the  city 
on  an  ass,  accepting  the  shouts  of  those  who  hailed 
him  as  the  Son  of  David ;  he  cleansed  the  temple ; 1  he 
defined  Messiahship.  But  all  was  in  vain.  His  very 
popularity,  which  suddenly  blazed  up  as  if  in  Galilee 
itself,  increased  his  danger.  So  far  from  being  only 
an  heretical  Galilean  lay  preacher,  he  appeared  an  in- 
cipient, if  not  an  open,  revolutionist.  His  persistent 
effort  to  be  understood  as  unpolitical  was  overlooked. 
The  Sadducees  joined  with  the  Pharisees  in  planning 
to  put  him  out  of  the  way.  It  was  better,  the  high 
priest  said,  that  one  man  should  die  than  that  the 
nation  should  perish.  Jesus  knew  his  danger,  but 
still  lingered  in  Jerusalem  to  eat  the  Passover  of  his 
people,  and,  if  possible,  win  over  the  crowds  of  re- 
ligionists to  his  conception  of  the  real  kingdom  of 
God.  For  he  saw  clearly  to  what  political  death  the 
popular  conception  would  lead  the  nation.2  Secure  in 
his  belief  that  his  Father  yet  had  work  for  him  to  do, 
and  protected  by  the  presence  of  his  Galilean  friends, 
he  went  openly  about  the  capital,  and  openly  attacked 
the  Pharisees  and  rabbis  because  of  their  elevation  of 
the  unimportant  over  the  essential  elements  of  religion. 
Yet  it  is  probable  he  would  have  returned  to  Galilee 
in  safety  had  he  not  been  betrayed  by  one  of  the 
twelve.  During  the  night  after  the  Passover  he  was 
suddenly  arrested.  Early  the  next  morning  he  was 
tried  and  condemned  at  an  irregular  meeting  of  the 
Sanhedrin.  The  Sadducean  priests  were  especially 
insistent,3  and  finally  the  procurator,  Pontius  Pilate, 
was  induced  to  approve  the  sentence  as  a  political 


1  Cf.  Ps.  of  Sol.  17  : 33. 

2  Lk.  19  :  42-44. 

3  Lk.  23  :  2-7  ;  cf.  Mk.  14  : 1,  10 ;  15  : 1, 11. 
Das  letzte  Passamahl  Christi,  Appendix. 


See  Chwolson7 


THE  MESSIANIC  HOPE  AND  JESUS       179 

necessity.     Jesus  was  crucified  as  a  revolutionist —  The  death 
the  "King  of  the  Jews,"  — and  buried  before  night.     of  Jesus< 

Had  he  been  simply  a  teacher,  the  story  would 
probably  have  to  stop  here.  But  he  had  done  more 
than  teach  —  he  had  founded  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  its  members,  then  in  Jerusalem,  though  few  in 
number,  remained  together,  and  not  being  molested 
by  the  city  officials,  waited,  they  knew  not  what.  And 
then  on  the  Sunday  after  the  Friday  on  which  Jesus 
had  been  buried  began  a  series  of  experiences,  which, 
were  they  not  well  attested,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  believe.  For  not  one  or  two,  but  many — even  hun- 
dreds —  maintained  they  saw  Jesus  again,  no  longer  His  resur- 
dead,  but  living  gloriously,  "the  first  fruits  of  those  rection- 
who  slept." 

Then,  better  than  before,  though  still  but  incom-  Thehegin- 
pletely,  did  they  appreciate  the  significance  of  his  life  church!*  the 
and  death  as  parts  of  his  Messianic  work,  and,  after  a 
few  weeks  spent  at  Jerusalem,  they  began  the  task  of 
converting  their  nation.    But  Jesus  was  no  longer  the 
humble,  neglected  teacher.     He  was  a  man  anointed 
of  God  with  the  Holy  Ghost,1  and  shown  to  be  the 
Christ  by  having  been  raised  from  the  dead.2     But  at 
once  the  influence  of  their  old  Messianic  hopes  was  The 
felt.     Jesus  himself  during  the  last  days  of  his  life  ^Oepsesiofnithe 
had  made  some  use  of  the  eschatological  elements  of  Apostles, 
the  older  hope,  and  these  the  disciples  now  seized 
upon  almost  to  the  exclusion  of  all  else.     The  king- 
dom had  not  yet  come,  but  would  appear  suddenly. 
Jesus  was,  indeed,  the  Messiah;  but  his  proper  Mes- 
sianic work  would  not  begin  until  his  second  com- 
ing, this  time  in  glory  in  the  clouds  of  heaven.     The 

1  Acts  10  : 38. 

2  Acts  2  :  24-32  ;  3  : 15  ;  4  : 10  ;  5  :  30  ;  10  :  40  ;  cf .  13  :  22-37. 

Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  I.  1-33  ;  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age, 
36-64 ;  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  258-275. 


180      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

group  of  disciples,  now  growing  rapidly,  no  longer  was 
thought  of  as  a  kingdom  that,  however  small,  would 
yet,  like  leaven,  transform  all  society;  but  as  a  con- 
gregation, a  community  of  men  and  women  engaged 
in  preparing  themselves  by  a  holy  life  to  welcome 
their  Lord  at  his  appearing,  and  then  to  reign  with 
him  in  glory  indescribable. 

The  two  And  thus  out  of  a  Judaism,  at  once  legalistic  and 

hopesamC  idealistic,  there  sprang  a  movement  which,  though 
not  abandoning  either  Mosaism  or  Pharisaism,  supple- 
mented both  by  a  passionate  belief  that  the  Messiah 
had  appeared,  that  the  preparation  for  his  final  com- 
ing in  judgment  was  moral  and  ethical,  and  that  the 
great  Messianic  kingdom  was  at  any  moment  to  be 
established  by  the  very  Jesus  whom  the  Jews  had  in 
their  ignorance  crucified.  From  the  day  of  Jesus, 
the  Jewish  people  were  thus  to  cherish  two  ideals  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  —  that  of  the  Pharisee  and  Zealot 
and  that  of  the  Christian.  Each  ideal  had  its  future, 
but  so  far  as  we  know,  Jesus  was  the  one  person  who 
foresaw  what  these  futures  would  be.  His  lamenta- 
tions over  the  cities  of  Galilee  and  Jerusalem  were 
prophecies  of  the  inevitable  outcome  of  the  rejection 
of  the  future  he  might  have  given  Judea,  as  certainly 
as,  through  his  followers,  he  has  made  Christian  peo- 
ple the  arbiters  of  the  world.  For  the  Messianism  of 
Pharisee  and  Zealot  was  to  bring  the  Jewish  nation 
to  its  end. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

HEROD    AGRIPPA   I   AND    HEROD    AGRIPPA   II1 

THE  early  years  of  Christianity  had  little  or  no  The  develop 


influence  upon  Judaism.     The   community   of  those 


who  accepted  Jesus  as  the  Messiah,  the  church,  re-  Chris- 
mained  loyal  to  the  temple  and  the  synagogue,  and  tiam  y* 
was  in  fact  a  sect  of  the  Jews.  But  before  any  con- 
siderable time  had  passed  there  sprang  up  within  the 
church  a  new  group  headed  by  Stephen,  one  of  seven 
men  chosen  to  relieve  the  twelve  of  a  part  of  their 
rapidly  increasing  work.  This  group  saw  that  if 
Jesus  really  were  the  Christ,  Judaism  was  no  longer 
final,  and  with  this  conviction  its  members  attacked 
the  exclusiveness  of  Pharisaism  in  much  the  same 
spirit  as  Jesus  himself.  As  might  have  been  ex- 
pected, Judaism  was  enraged.  Stephen  met  his  Mas-  Stephen. 
ter's  fate,  and  there  broke  out  a  fierce  attack  upon 
the  new  sect.  This  persecution,  however,  but  intensi- 
fied the  Christians'  zeal,  and  wherever  they  were  scat- 
tered they  organised  new  communities.  The  persecu- 
tion was  doubtless  Sadducean  in  part,  but  its  chief 
agent  was  a  Pharisee,  Saul  of  Tarsus.  In  him  relig- 
ious persecution  had  its  most  conscientious  agent, 
and  Judaism  its  most  consistent  representative.  Yet 

1  General  Keferences  :  Schiirer,   The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  II.  150-165  ;  Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  II.   175-200  ;  Hausrath,  History  of  New  Testament 
Times,  Time  of  the  Apostles,  II.  III. 
181 


182      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Saul  Paul,  when  the  persecution  was  at  its  height  Saul  himself  was 
converted,  and  immediately  took  Stephen's  position 
more  distinctly  than  had  Stephen  himself.  Although 
his  first  work  is  not  clearly  recorded,  it  seems  that 
from  the  moment  of  his  conversion  he  saw  that  others 
than  Jews  would  share  in  the  Messianic  kingdom,  and 
that  therefore  the  good  news  should  be  preached  to 
them.  His  work  as  a  result  lay  outside  of  Palestine, 
and  the  churches  of  Jerusalem  and  Judea  remained 
Jewish,  the  mass  of  their  members  as  devoted  to 
the  oral  Law  as  before  their  acceptance  of  Jesus  as 
the  Christ.  None  the  less,  the  religious  authorities  of 
Judea  seem  to  have  been  suspicious  of  them,  even  if 
persecution  for  a  time  was  stilled. 

While  thus  the  new  fraternity  was  spreading  in  all 
directions,  the  history  of  Palestinian  Judaism  de- 
veloped along  the  lines  already  set  by  Pharisaism. 
The  administration  of  Pilate  was  brought  to  a  close 
by  events  that  very  well  represent  the  power  of  the 
rabbis.  As  if  in  imitation  of  Jesus,  there  appeared  a 
Messianism  prophet  in  Samaria  who  promised  to  reveal  the  hiding 
in  Samana.  p}ace  of  ^e  sacred  vessels  Moses  was  believed  to  have 
buried  on  Mount  Gerizim.  The  Samaritans  assembled 
in  large  numbers  in  answer  to  his  call,  all  with  arms. 
Pilate,  fearing  a  revolt,  attacked  the  gathering,  killing 
and  imprisoning  many  of  the  crowd.  Thereupon  the 
Samaritans  complained  to  Vitellius,  then  on  a  special 
mission  to  Syria,1  and  by  him  Pilate  was  compelled  to 
go  to  Rome  for  trial,  Marcellus  being  made  procura- 
tor in  his  stead.2 

The  downfall  of  Pilate  is  only  one  evidence  of  the 
more  friendly  attitude  of  Rome  toward  Judea  that 
characterised  the  later  years  of  Tiberius.  Even  be- 
fore this  event  Pilate  had  been  obliged  by  the  em- 

1  Tacitus,  Annals,  vi.  32.  2  Ant.  xviii.  4  : 1,  2. 


HEROD  AGIUPPA   I  183 

peror,  in  answer  to  the  urgent  petition  of  the  sons  of 
Herod,  to  take  down  some  votive  shields  he  had  hung  The  Romans 
up  in  the  royal  palace  at  Jerusalem.1  Vitellius  now  jg™sur  the 
apparently  attempted  still  further  to  conciliate  the 
Jews.  He  attended  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  where 
he  remitted  taxes  upon  the  sale  of  fruit,  and  gave  up 
the  high  priests'  robes,  which,  since  the  beginning  of 
the  procuratorial  administration,  partly  because  of  an 
ancient  custom,  partly  as  a  sort  of  pledge  of  good  con- 
duct, had  been  honourably  kept  by  the  Romans  in 
the  castle  of  Antonia.  He  still  kept  control  of  the 
appointment  of  high  priests,  however,  but  probably 
used  it  also  in  such  a  way  as  to  please  the  people.2  A 
further  act  of  conciliation  was  shown,  when,  in  his 
expedition  against  Petra,  he  inarched  through  Esdrae- 
lon  and  Perea,  rather  than  carry  his  standards  through 
Judea.3 

The  death  of  Tiberius  enabled  Caligula  to  do  Phari- 
saism an  even  greater  service  by  appointing  Herod 
Agrippa,  son  of  Aristobulus,  and  grandson  of  Herod  I, 
as  king  over  what  had  been  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip 
as  well  as  the  small  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias  (37  A.D.). 

The  account  of  this  man's  life  reads  like  a  romance. 
Educated,  like  the  other  Herodian  princes,  in  E/ome,  Agrippa  I. 
he  had  there  acquired  the  habits  of  the  early  empire, 
and  at  the  age  of  forty  found  himself  in  disfavour 
with  Tiberius,  bankrupt,  and  a  fugitive  from  his 
creditors.  He  succeeded  in  reaching  Palestine,  where 
he  shut  himself  up  in  a  tower  on  the  border  of  the 
southern  desert,4  and  would  have  committed  suicide 
had  it  not  been  for  his  energetic  wife,  Cypros.  As  a 
last  resort  she  went  to  Agrippa' s  sister,  Herodias,  who 

1  Philo,  Legation  to  Caius,  38. 

2  Ant.  xviii.  4:3.  3  ^nt.  xviii.  5  :  3. 

4  Malatha,  possibly  Tell-el-Milh,  thirteen  miles  east  of  Beer- 
sheba. 


184      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


His  early 
life. 


Made  king. 


had  already  married  Herod  Antipas,1  and  through  hei 
obtained  from  the  tetrarch  the  appointment  of  Agrippa 
as  superintendent  of  markets  in  Tiberias.  Such  a 
humiliating  position  could  not  long  satisfy  the  man, 
and,  because  of  a  quarrel  over  their  cups,  Agrippa 
left  his  uncle-brother-in-law  to  get  aid  from  his 
friend  Flaccus,  the  propraetor  of  Syria.2  With  him 
he  remained  until  his  brother,  Aristobulus,  detecting 
him  accepting  bribes  from  the  citizens  of  Damascus, 
reported  him  to  Flaccus,  who  forced  the  unhappy  man 
again  out  upon  his  wanderings.  Reduced  to  the  last 
extremities,  Agrippa  determined  to  go  once  more  to 
Italy.  With  the  aid  of  his  freedman,  Maesgas,  he 
succeeded  in  borrowing  a  considerable  sum  of  money 
and  started  for  Egypt,  barely  escaping  arrest  for  debt 
as  he  was  leaving  Anthedon.  At  Alexandria  he  bor- 
rowed a  much  larger  sum  from  the  brother  of  Philo 
on  his  wife's  credit,  and  thus  equipped,  sent  his  family 
back  to  Judea,  while  he  went  on  to  Rome.3  There  he 
became  intimate  with  Caius,  who,  with  all  the  empire, 
was  waiting  impatiently  for  Tiberius  to  die.  Un- 
fortunately Agrippa  expressed  this  desire  before  a 
charioteer  who,  in  revenge  for  some  injury,  repeated 
it  to  the  old  emperor,  and  Agrippa  was  promptly 
thrown  into  chains.  He  was  not  released  until  Caius 
was  finally  seated  as  emperor.4  Once  appointed  king  he 
seems  to  have  spent  much  of  his  time  in  Rome,  where 
his  friendship  with  the  emperor  won  him  also  the 
territories  of  the  unlucky  Herod  Antipas  (39  A.D.),  and 
enabled  him  to  render  the  Jews  service  at  an  im- 
portant crisis. 

1  This  fact  enables  us  to  date  the  return  of  Agrippa  28-30  A.D., 
probably  the  latter. 

2  Ant.  xviii.  6  :  2. 

8  Ant.  xviii.  6  : 3.     The  date  is  fixed  at  36  A.D.  by  Ant.  xviii. 
5:3.  *  Ant.  xviii.  6  : 1-11. 


HEBOD  AGRIPPA  I  185 

The  accession  of  the  mad  Caligula  was  an  occasion 
for  a  new  outburst  of  anti-semitism,  and  Agrippa  was 
unintentionally  its  occasion.  For  his  presence  in  Alex- 
andria was  made  the  occasion  for  a  considerable  out- 
break against  the  Jews,  who  would  not  join  with  the 
other  provincials  in  paying  divine  honours  to  the 
emperor.  The  Jewish  quarter  was  pillaged,  men  and  Anti-Semitic 
women  abused,  and  statues  of  Caligula  were  placed  under^ 
in  the  synagogues.1  The  governor  of  Alexandria  had  Caligula, 
even  taken  from  the  Jews  the  rights  of  citizenship  in 
the  city.  The  outbreak  finally  became  a  genuine  per- 
secution, and  the  Jews  appealed  to  the  emperor. 
But  their  embassy,  although  headed  by  Philo  himself, 
accomplished  nothing ;  for  Caligula,  instead  of  listen- 
ing to  their  petition,  asked  them  why  they  would  not 
eat  pork !  At  the  same  time,  the  monomania  of  Ca- 
ligula as  to  his  divinity,  brought  even  more  serious 
difficulties  upon  Judea  itself.  The  heathen  citizens 
of  Jamnia  erected  an  altar  to  the  emperor,  and  the 
Jewish  citizens  immediately  destroyed  it.  The  deed 
was  reported  to  the  emperor,  and  immediately  he 
gave  orders  to  have  his  statue  erected  in  the  temple 
at  Jerusalem,2  and  Petronius,  the  legate  of  Syria, 
was  sent  with  a  strong  force  to  see  that  the  com- 
mand was  fulfilled.  The  Jews  were  overwhelmed  with 
despair,  and  begged  Petronius  to  kill  them  rather  than 
do  their  temple  the  indignity.  Fortunately,  the  legate 
was  a  considerate  man,  and  at  the  request  of  Agrippa  Agrippa 
and  other  prominent  Jews  in  various  ways  delayed  privileges 
the  fulfilment  of  the  order  until  he  had  personally  for  Judea. 
appealed  to  Caligula.  Agrippa  was  himself  in  E/ome 
when  the  legate's  letter  arrived,  and  was  able,  at  a 
banquet,  to  win  from  the  emperor  a  reversal  of  the 
command.  Petronius,  however,  was  directed  to  com- 

1  Ant.  xviii.  8:1;  Philo,  Legation  to  Caius,  44-46. 

2  Philo,  Legation  to  Caius,  30  j  Ant.  xviii.  8  : 2-9. 


186      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

mit  suicide,  but  escaped  his  fate  through  the  assassina- 
tion of  the  emperor.1 
Claudius  With  the  accession  of  Claudius  (41  A.D.),  a  new  era 

seeme(^  to  °Pen  f°r  tne  Jews.  Singularly  enough, 
Claudius  was  under  considerable  obligation  to  Agrippa 
for  his  elevation  to  the  empire,2  and  promptly  met  it 
by  giving  him  all  the  territory  that  had  belonged  to 
Herod  I,  together  with  the  right  to  appoint  the  high 
priests.  In  addition,  he  gave  Agrippa' s  brother, 
Herod,  the  little  kingdom  of  Chalcis,  returned  to  the 
Jews  of  Alexandria  their  old  privileges,  and  extended 
equal  rights  to  Jews  throughout  the  empire3  (41  A.D.). 
This  revival  of  the  kingdom  of  Judea,  under  an 
Asmonean-Herodian,  gave  a  new  impulse  to  Judaism. 
Far  more  than  his  grandfather,  Agrippa,  though  by 
no  means  unfriendly  to  Hellenism,  was  regardful  of 
his  subjects'  religious  convictions.  From  the  first 
he  observed  the  customs  and  ceremonies  enforced  by 
Pharisaism ;  lived  in  Jerusalem ;  kept  all  portraits 
off  the  coinage  of  Jerusalem ; 4  guarded  the  sanctity  of 
Jewish  synagogues,  even  in  Phoenicia;  appointed  an 
acceptable  high  priest;  compelled  a  prospective  son- 
in-law  to  be  circumcised;  and  himself  took  part  in 
the  services  of  the  temple,5  where  he  was  saluted  by 
the  people  as  their  true  brother.6  He  also  attacked 
Christianity,  killing  James  and  arresting  Peter.7 
There  are  even  indications  that  he  had  ambitions  to 
build  up  Judea  into  the  head  of  a  confederacy  of 
allied  kingdoms,  for  he  strengthened  the  fortifications 
of  Jerusalem  greatly,  and  would  undoubtedly  have 

1  Ant.  xviii.  8:3.  3  Ant.  xix.  5  : 1-3. 

2  Ant.  xix.  4  : 1-2.  4  Madden,  Coins  of  Jews,  in  loco.  , 
6  Ant.  xix.  6:1-4;  7:3. 

6  Derenbourg,  217.     Naturally  Agrippa  (with  his  wife)   is 
something  of  a  favourite  in  the  Talmud. 

7  Acts  12  ;  2,  3. 


HEROD  AGRIPPA   I  187 

made  the  city  impregnable  had  Claudius  not  com- 
manded him  to  stop  the  work.1  He  also  held  a 
conference  of  five  kings  at  Tiberias,2  although  this 
was  broken  up  by  the  legate  of  Syria  before  it  had 
accomplished  anything. 

Yet,  while  thus  careful  to  maintain  the  best  rela-  Hellenism  of 
tions  with  his  people,  Agrippa  was  enough  of  a  ASriPPa- 
Herodian  to  be  fond  of  the  amusements  of  the  Graeco- 
Roman  world.  One  of  his  coins,  struck  by  Gaza,  rep- 
resents a  temple  of  Marna,3  and  at  Berytus  (Beirut) 
he  built  baths,  colonnades,  a  theatre,  and  an  amphi- 
theatre, at  the  opening  of  which  fourteen  hundred 
criminals  were  made  to  slaughter  each  other.4  He 
also  celebrated  games  at  Csesarea,  in  honour  of  the 
emperor.  It  was,  in  fact,  at  these  games  that  he 
was  suddenly  struck  down  by  a  mysterious  and  fatal 
disease,5  just  as  he  had  allowed  his  courtiers  to 
address  him  as  a  god  (44  A.D.). 

With  his  death  the  second  short  halcyon  age  of  Severity  of 
Judaism  closed.  It  had  been  the  first  intention  |j 
of  Claudius  to  make  Agrippa  II,  the  only  son  of 
Agrippa  I,  then  a  boy  of  seventeen  years,  king  in  his 
father's  place;  but  his  court  had  persuaded  him  to  do 
otherwise,  and  for  a  short  time  the  entire  kingdom  of 
Judea  was  under  a  procurator.6  Agrippa,  however, 
was  soon  to  enjoy  something  of  the  good  fortune 
that  belonged  to  his  house.  The  procurator,  Fadus, 
though  clearing  Judea  of  robbers,  had  marked  the 
return  of  a  Roman  administration  by  seizing  the 
vestment  of  the  high  priest,  and  putting  it  again  into 
the  castle  of  Antonia,  where  it  might  be  under  his 
control,  as  it  had  been  under  that  of  the  earlier  pro- 
curators. The  Jews  bitterly  resented  the  act,  and 

1  Ant.  xix.  7:2.  3  Madden,  Coins  of  the  Jews,  137. 

2  Ant.  xix.  8:1.  *  Ant.  xix.  7:5. 

*  Ant.  xix.  8:2;  Acts  12  :  19-23.  6  Ant.  xix.  9  :  2. 


188      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

with  the  consent  of  Fadus,  and  Longinus,  the  proprsetoi 
of  Syria,  they  sent  an  embassy  to  Claudius,  asking 
that   the   vestments   be   left  in   their   own  keeping. 
Agrippa  lent  his  influence  to  the  petition,  and  was 
able  to  gain  a  favourable  decision  from  the  emperor.1 
Agrippa  II     As    a    further    proof  of    his   regard,  Claudius   gave 
?hor?tylover  Agrippa,  in  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign  (49-50  A.D.), 
the  high         the  kingdom  of  Chalcis,  which  had  belonged  to  his 
uncle,  Herod.2     With  this  little  kingdom  went  the 
authority  over  the  temple  and  the  sacred  money,  as 
well  as  the  right  to  appoint  the  high  priest,  all  of 
which  Herod  had  obtained   from   Claudius.3    About 
this  time  Agrippa  was  again  of  great  service  to  the 
Jews   in  bringing   about  the   acquittal   of  the  high 
priest  Ananias,  and  Ananus  the  commander  of  Jerusa- 
lem, both  of  whom  Cum  anus  had  sent  to  the  imperial 
court,  under  the  charge  of  fomenting  rebellion.4    In 
53  A.D.  he  exchanged  the  kingdom  of  Chalcis  for  the 
Growth  of      tetrarchy  of  Philip,  to  which  were  added,  by  Nero, 
ofeAgnp^m  Porti°ns    °f    Perea    and    Galilee,    including,    among 
II.  others,  the  city  of  Tiberias.5    A  much  weaker  man 

than  his  father,  Agrippa  II  maintained  friendships 
with  Pharisee  and  heathen  alike,  but  succeeded  in 
winning  considerable  favour  from  the  rabbis  them- 

1  Ant.  xx.  1  : 1,  2. 

2  Ant.  xx.  5  :  2.     The  date  is  corroborated  by  Ant.  xx.  7:1. 

3  Ant.  xx.  1  :  3. 

*  Ant.  xx.  6  :  3.  The  first  exercise  of  his  right  to  appoint  a 
high  priest  occurred  during  the  administration  of  Felix,  when 
he  appointed  Ishmael  as  the  successor  of  Jonathan,  who  had 
been  assassinated  by  the  Sicarii  {Ant.  xx.  8:5,  8).  Shortly 
after,  in  revenge  for  IshmaePs  success  in  obtaining  the  sanction 
of  Nero  for  a  wall  he  had  built  to  cut  off  Agrippa's  unwarranted 
espionage  of  the  temple,  Agrippa  deposed  him  and  appointed 
Joseph  in  his  stead  (Ant.  xx.  8  : 11).  He  repeated  this  high- 
handed act  several  times  (Ant.  xx.  9:1). 

6  Ant.  xx.  8  : 4  ;   War,  ii.  13  :  2. 


HEROD  AGBIPPA  I  189 

selves.1  Yet  his  long  reign  (50-100)  resulted  in 
nothing  of  importance,  and  when  the  Jew  and  Roman 
were  at  last  at  war,  Agrippa  II  was  found  fighting 
against  his  countryman. 

i  Derenbourg,  252-254  ;  cf.  Acts  26  : 1-3,  27. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE   FALL    OP   JUDEA   AND    THE     RISE     OF     THE     CHRIS- 
TIAN   CHURCH1 

Judea  under  WITH  the  death  of  Agrippa  I  there  began  a  series 
tors?1'  ira"  °^  procurators  who,  with  the  exception  of  Fadus,  were 
worthy  representatives  in  Judea  of  emperors  like 
Claudius  and  Nero  in  Rome.  Yet  under  Fadus,  Juda- 
ism seemed  to  enjoy  nearly  the  same  privileges  as 
under  Agrippa  I,  for  although  he  attempted  at  first  to 
control  the  vestments  of  the  high  priest,2  he  readily 
allowed  the  matter  to  be  adjudicated.  During  his  ad- 
ministration, also,  Queen  Helena,  of  Adiabene,  visited 
the  city,  sent  it  provisions  in  time  of  famine,  and 
finally  was  buried  just  outside  its  walls.3  But  under 
him  began  the  succession  of  disturbances  that  led 
directly  to  the  great  outbreak  in  66  A.D.  The  nation 
Messianic  was  filled  with  Messianic  hopes  and  at  one  time  a 
certain  Theudas  promised  to  divide  the  Jordan  and  to 
lead  his  followers  across  it  to  some  unknown  bless- 
ings. Fadus  dispersed  the  crowd  and  beheaded 
Theudas,  but  brought  no  quiet  to  the  country.4  Under 
Alexander,  the  next  procurator,  who,  though  a  nephew 

1  General  References :    ScMrer,    The  Jewish  People  in  the 
Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  Div.  I.  II.  166-191,  207-256 ;  Graetz, 
History  of  the  Jews,  II.  234-323  ;  Hausrath,  New   Testament 
Times,  Pt.  II.  IV.  187-245;   Ewald,  History  of  Israel,  VII. 
412-426,  479,  616. 

2  Ant.  xx.  1  : 1. 

8  Ant.  xx.  2  : 1-5  ;  4  :  3.  4  Ant.  xx.  5  : 1. 

190 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  191 

of  Philo,  had  abandoned  Judaism,  the  two  sons  of 
that  Judas  of  Galilee  who  had  led  the  revolt  at  the 
time  of  the  taxing  under  Quirinius,  were  crucified, 
probably  for  some  attempt  at  insurrection.1  Under 
Cumanus  a  terrible  massacre  of  Jews  took  place  at  the 
Passover,  as  a  punishment  for  their  rioting,  because  of 
a  soldier's  indecent  insult  to  the  temple.  Another  riot, 
due  to  another  soldier's  abuse  of  some  sacred  books, 
was  prevented  only  by  the  execution  of  the  offender.2 
At  another  time,  as  the  Galileans  were  going  up  to 
the  Passover  through  Samaria,  they  were  attacked  Disorders  in 
near  Ginea  (Jeniri)  by  the  Samaritans.  As  Cumanus 
had  been  bribed  not  to  punish  the  offenders,  a  body  of 
Jews  under  Eleazar  and  Alexander,  two  "  robbers," 
burned  several  Samaritan  villages  and  killed  their  in- 
habitants. Cumanus,  in  turn,  fell  upon  the  invaders, 
killing  some  and  imprisoning  others.  The  matter 
was  then  carried  to  Quadratus,  legate  of  Syria,  and 
by  him  to  Claudius.  Thanks  to  the  influence  of 
Agrippa  II  the  Jews  won  their  case,  and  Cumanus 
was  banished;  Felix,  the  brother  of  the  notorious 
Pallas,  being  sent  as  procurator  in  his  stead.3 

1  Ant.  xx.  5  :  2. 

2  Ant.  xx.  5  :  3,  4  ;   War,  ii.  12  : 1,  2. 

3  Ant.  xx.  6:1-3;   War,  ii.  12  :  3-7.     Unfortunately,  at  this 
point,  Josephus  ( Ant.  xx.  7  : 1)  and  Tacitus  ( Ann.  xii.  54)  are  in 
direct  contradiction,  the  former  distinctly  making  Felix  the 
successor  of  Cumanus,  when  Tacitus  makes  him  procurator  of 
Samaria  and  Judea  while  Cumanus  was  procurator  of  Galilee, 
and  declares  that  the  two  men  were  tried  by  Quadratus  at  the 
same  time  for  maladministration,  and  that  Felix  was  acquitted. 
The  matter  is  complicated  by  the  statement  of  Josephus  as  to 
a  trial  of  Felix  upon  which  depends  the  date  of  the  accession 
of  Festus.     As  against  Tacitus  (1)  there  is  no  evidence  that 
Galilee  was  a  separate  procuratorial  province,  (2)  it  was  not  so 
treated  by  Nero,  who  gave  only  a  portion  of  it  t'o  Agrippa  II 
(Ant.  xx.   8:4),  and  (3)  troubles  in  Perea  were  settled  by 
Fadus,  procurator  of  Judea  (Ant.  xx.  1:1),  who  is  distinctly 


192      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Messianic 
distur- 
bances. 


Zealots  and 
Sicarii. 


Under  Felix  the  rebellious  elements  of  Jewish  life 
became  even  more  evident,  and  the  country  was 
disturbed  by  Zealots  and  impostors  who  persuaded 
crowds  to  follow  them  into  the  wilderness  where  they 
promised  to  work  signs  by  the  power  of  God.  How 
far  these  men  represented  some  turbulent  Messianism 
it  is  not  possible  to  say,  but  doubtless  to  a  considera- 
ble extent.  One  prophet  in  particular,  an  Egyptian, 
seems  to  have  posed  as  a  sort  of  Messiah,  for  he  gath- 
ered a  great  crowd  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives,  prom- 
ising to  make  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  fall.  Felix 
scattered  the  mob,  but  the  Egyptian  himself  escaped.1 
The  disturbances,  however,  were  repeated,  and  Felix 
was  constantly  compelled  to  disperse  crowds  of  men, 
"  clean  in  their  hands,"  who  were  looking  for  divine 
deliverance.2  In  addition  there  were  the  bands  of 
"  robbers/'  in  whom,  because  of  their  popularity,  it  is 
easy  to  see  revolutionists  rather  than  mere  bandits. 
One  of  their  leaders,  Eleazar,  maintained  himself  for 
twenty  years.  Felix  captured  great  numbers  of  these 
men,  crucifying  some  and  sending  others  to  Home,3 
but  was  unable  to  destroy  the  movement.  Instead, 
the  feeling  of  the  people  grew  the  more  intense. 
Bands  of  Zealots  ranged  through  the  country,  urging 
men  to  revolt,  plundering  the  well-to-do  citizens,  kill- 
ing and  burning.  At  the  same  time  bands  of  Sicarii — 
men  who  carried  daggers  under  their  clothes  —  began 
an  almost  systematic  assassination  of  their  enemies, 
beginning  with  the  high  priest,  whose  death  was  also 
desired  by  the  procurator  himself.4 

said  to  have  been  put  in  charge  of  the  entire  kingdom  of 
Agrippa  I  (Ant.  xix.  9:2).  For  a  discussion  of  the  chronologi- 
cal question,  see  below. 

1  Ant.  xx.  8  :  6  ;  cf.  Acts  21  :  38. 

2  War,  ii.  13  :  4.  3  War,  ii.  13  : 2. 
*  Ant.  xx.  8  :  5  ;   War,  ii.  13  : 3. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  193 

Had  Felix  been  a  strong  governor  or  a  good  man,  Recall  of 
this  incipient  anarchy  might  have  been  checked,  but  he 
lost  the  respect  of  his  subjects  as  much  by  the  laxity 
of  his  life  as  by  the  bursts  of  severity  with  which 
he  punished  all  offenders.1  The  country  grew  full  of 
unrest  and  violence,  of  high  priests  quarrelling  with 
the  lower  priests,  or  Jews  quarrelling  with  heathen, 
of  humble  people  eager  to  join  in  a  revolt,  and  when 
Felix  was  recalled  by  Nero,  he  left  a  country  which 
though  legally  enjoying  exceptional  privileges,  had 
been  excited  by  its  fanatical  citizens  into  incipient 
rebellion  (60-61  A.D.).2 

1  Ant.  xx.  8  :  7,  8  ;   War,  ii.  13  :  7. 

2  The  date  of  the  recall  of  Felix  is  of  the  utmost  value  for 
the  chronology  of  the  apostolic  age,  but  is  involved  in  the  dis- 
crepancy, already  mentioned,  between  Josephus  and  Tacitus. 
Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Zeitgeschichte,  129  sq. ;   Blass, 
Acta  Apostolorum,  21-24,  Harnack,   Chronologie,  I.  233  sq., 
and  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age,  353-358,  favour  an  early  date 
(55  or  56),  the  commonly  accepted  view  being  60  or  61,  though 
Ramsay  prefers  59.    The  chief  arguments  for  the  earlier  date 
are  :  (1)  The  statement  of  Eusebius'  Chronicle,  which  places 
the  arrival    of    Festus  in  the  year   October  55-October  56. 
(2)  The  acquittal  of  Felix  is  said  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xx.  8  : 9) 
to  have  been  due  to  the  influence  of  Pallas  "  who  at  that  mo- 
ment stood  very  high  in  Nero's  favour,"  but  according  to  Taci- 
tus (Ann.  xiii.  14,  15)  Pallas  was  removed  from  his  office  in  the 
beginning  of  55.     (3)  Felix  was  procurator  not  after  Cumanus, 
but  at  the  same  time  according  to  Tacitus  (Ann.  xii.  54).     In 
reply  it  can  be  said :  (1)  The  chronology  of   the  Eusebian 
Chronicle  is  based  upon  Josephus,  and  its   only  originality 
lies  in  deliberate  changes.     (2)  Josephus  was  probably  mis- 
taken when  he  said  Pallas  was  in  favour  with  Nero  at  the 
time  Felix  was  acquitted.     (3)  As  has  already  appeared,  there 
is  absolutely  no  evidence  that  Tacitus  is  correct  as  regards  the 
procuratorship  of  Felix,  except  the  a  priori  feeling  that  it  is 
hard  to  see  how  he  should  have  made  his  statement  unless  it 
were  true  —  a  most  uncertain  foundation  upon  which  to  build 
a  revolutionary  chronology.     (4)  It  is  hard  to  crowd  the  events, 
assigned  by  Josephus  to  the   administration  of  Felix,   into 


194      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

Festus.  The  successor  of  Felix  was  Porcius  Festus  [60(61)- 

62],  a  man  of  good  intentions,  but  whose  untimely 
death  forbade  his  short  administration's  leaving  any 
permanent  good  effects.  Like  Felix,  he  was  compelled 
to  deal  with  the  Sicarii  and  with  an  impostor  who 
promised  his  followers  deliverance  from  their  miseries 
if  they  would  but  follow  him  into  the  wilderness.1 
Paul  and  Both  Felix  and  Festus  are  of  especial  interest  from 

tors.Pr°CUra"  tne  fact  that  Paul— the  Saul  of  earlier  days— was 
brought  before  them  on  charges  preferred  by  the  au- 
thorities of  Jerusalem.  He  had  been  arrested  in  the 
temple  on  the  false  charge  of  having  brought  Gentiles 
beyond  their  court;  had  been  nearly  killed  by  the 
mob,  and  nearly  tortured  by  the  Roman  centurion  as 
one  of  the  numerous  impostors.  After  a  trial  before 

less  than  five  or  six  years.  (5)  Keckoning  back  from  Albinus 
to  Festus  makes  56  almost  impossible.  (6)  It  is  quite  impos- 
sible to  bring  the  events  given  by  Josephus  and  the  Acts  into 
the  time  the  earlier  date  compels  (Oct.  13,  54-Feb.  13,  55). 

(7)  Josephus  when  twenty-six  went  to  Rome  to  defend  several 
priests  arrested  by  Felix,  and  succeeded  in  interesting  Poppaea, 
wife  of  Nero.     This  must  have  been   at  least  after  58,  for 
Poppsea's  influence  did  not  begin  till  then.     But  it  was  prob- 
ably later  (her  marriage  was  in  62) ,  for  on  his  return  Josephus 
found  his  country   at  the  verge  of  revolution   (Life,  3,  4). 

(8)  According  to  Ant.  xx.  8  :  9,  the  quarrel  between  the  Jewish 
and  heathen  inhabitants  of  Caesarea  led  to  the  trial  of  Felix, 
and  also  indirectly  to  the  outbreak  of  66.     (9)  It  is  difficult  to 
see  how  Josephus  could  have  been  utterly  mistaken  as  regards 
important  events  happening  under  his  very  eyes.     See  Turner, 
article  "  Chronology  of  the  New  Testament,"  in  Hastings'  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Bible;  Ramsay,  Expositor,  March,  1897;  Christie, 
New  World,  October,  1897  ;  Mathews,  Biblical  World,  Novem- 
ber, 1897,  354-358 ;  Schtirer,  Zeitschrift  fur  wissenschaftliche 
Theologie,  January,  1898,  21-42.   A  good  summary  of  the  entire 
discussion  as  to  the  chronology  of  Acts  is  given  by  Votaw, 
Biblical  World,  February  and  March,  1898.     See  also  Gilbert, 
Student's  Life  of  Paul,  242-255. 

i  Ant.  xx.  8  : 10. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  195 

the  Sanhedrin,  he  had  been  sent  down  to  Csesarea  to 
protect  him  from  a  band  of  Sicarii  who  had  vowed  to 
kill  him.  Neither  Felix  nor  Festus  could  find  any 
ground  on  which  to  keep  him  in  prison,  beyond  the 
general  hostility  of  the  Jews  and  the  possibility  that 
he  might  be  another  agitator.  Festus  proposed  to  take 
him  up  to  Jerusalem  again  for  trial,  but  Paul  appealed 
to  Caesar  and  accordingly  was  sent  to  Rome  shortly 
after  the  arrival  of  Festus.  It  is  noteworthy  that  be- 
yond the  case  of  Paul,  the  Christians  do  not  seem  to 
have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  procurators. 

The  successor  of  Festus  was  one  Albinus  (62-64),  Attempts  at 
but  he  did  not  reach  Judea  until  several  months  after 
the  death  of  Festus.  During  this  interregnum,  the 
high  priest  Ananus,  the  second  of  the  name,  a  noble 
man  and  a  persistent  enemy  of  Zealotry,  to  which  he 
at  last  fell  a  victim,1  undertook  to  clear  the  country  of 
dangerous  characters.  He  therefore  seized  James  the 
brother  of  Jesus,  and  after  having  had  him  tried  by 
the  Sanhedrin,  caused  him  to  be  stoned.  Agrippa, 
however,  deposed  Ananus  after  a  pontificate  of  only 
three  months,  and  the  national  unrest  was  left  without 
an  enemy.  While  the  Pharisees  were  ready  to  abide 
by  their  legal  rights,  the  anti-Roman  feeling  grew  more 
intense  among  the  Zealots.  The  Sicarii  constantly 
kidnapped  the  servants  of  the  high  priest  in  order  to 
compel  their  master  to  bring  about  by  exchange  the 
release  of  some  of  their  own  number  then  in  prison, 
and  not  content  with  this  ravaged  the  whole  country. 
Rival  high  priests  engaged  in  miniature  civil  war. 
Desperate  members  of  the  nobility  turned  robbers, 
and  to  cap  all,  Albinus,  who  seems  to  have  received 
bribes  by  the  wholesale,  in  order  to  gain  favour  with 
the  Jews  when  once  he  learned  he  was  to  be  removed, 

1  See,  especially,  War,  iv.  5  :  2. 


196      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Estimate  of 
the  govern- 
ment of  the 


sold  their  freedom  to  all  Jews  who  had  been  impris- 
oned on  trifling  charges,  killed  the  others,  and  left  the 
jails  empty.1  And  in  the  midst  of  all  this  disorder  we 
find  Levites  petitioning  Agrippa  to  let  them  wear  the 
robes  of  priests,  and  Agrippa  permitting  the  priests  to 
use  the  temple  treasures  to  pave  the  entire  city  with 
white  stone  and  thus  give  employment  to  eighteen 
thousand  workmen  left  idle  by  the  (64  A.D.)  comple- 
tion of  the  temple.2 

The  last  procurator  was  Gessius  Florus,  who,  accord- 
ing to  Josephus,  so  outdid  Albinus  in  wickedness,  that 
procurators,  in  comparison  that  rascal  seemed  a  benefactor.  He  is 
said  to  have  robbed  cities  and  to  have  become  a  partner 
with  highwaymen.  He  devastated  whole  toparchies, 
mocked  his  subjects'  complaints  to  Cestius  Gallus, 
legate  of  Syria,  and  in  order  to  prevent  complaints 
reaching  the  emperor;3  endeavoured  to  drive  the  Jews 
into  open  rebellion.  But  these  charges  are  so  indefi- 
nite as  to  raise  suspicion.  In  fact,  most  of  the  accu- 
sations brought  by  Josephus  against  the  procurators, 
when  thoroughly  sifted,  witness  to  their  desire  to  main- 
tain order  by  punishing  murderers  and  agitators  rather 
than  to  wickedness.  Doubtless  they  did  fail  to  sym- 
pathise with  all  the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  and  they 
were  certainly  open  to  bribes ;  but  their  bad  adminis- 
tration might,  like  that  of  Felix,  have  been  brought  to 
punishment  at  the  imperial  court.  The  real  destroyers 
of  the  Jewish  state,  as  Jesus  had  foretold  and  as  Jose- 
phus himself  at  times  sees,  were  the  Zealot  Messianic 
party  with  its  following  among  the  poorer  classes. 
They  deliberately  sought  to  found  a  kingdom  of  God 
upon  earth  with  the  dagger  and  the  sword.4  And  they 
had  their  wish. 


i  Ant.  xx.  9:1-5;   War,  ii.  14  : 1. 
»  Ant.  xx.  11  : 1 ;   War,  ii.  14  : 1-3. 
*  Cf .  Tacitus,  Histories,  v.  13. 


2  Ant.  xx.  9  :  6,  7. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  197 

Under  Floras,  the  revolutionary  movement  got  con-  Circum- 
trol  of  Jerusalem,  and  so  of  Judea,  through  a  sue-  S^Sth?*" 
cession  of  events  that  were  thoroughly  trivial.  A  Jewish  war. 
quarrel  in  Csesarea  over  buildings  crowding  in  upon  a 
synagogue,  a  series  of  petty  insults  added  to  the  old 
causes  of  hatred  between  Jews  and  Greeks  in  that 
city,  a  mistake  of  Florus,  an  impudent  jest  against  the 
procurator  —  these  it  was  that  precipitated  as  desper- 
ate and  murderous  a  war  as  the  world  has  seen.1  It  is 
needless  to  recall  the  details  fully.  It  is  enough  to 
say  that  when  Florus  had  gone  to  Jerusalem  instead 
of  to  Csesarea,  despite  the  prayers  of  Berenice,  sister 
of  Agrippa  II,  then  in  Jerusalem  fulfilling  a  vow,  he 
allowed  his  soldiers  to  plunder  the  city  and  even  to 
kill  many  of  its  inhabitants  as  a  punishment.  For  a 
moment  it  looked  as  if  Agrippa  and  the  well-to-do 
classes  would  be  able  to  persuade  the  masses  to  follow 
the  legal  course  of  complaint  to  the  emperor,  and  to 
pay  their  taxes  already  due ;  but  when  it  came  to  sub- 
mitting again  to  Florus,  the  people  would  not  listen, 
and  broke  out  into  new  violence.2  A  band  of  Sicarii 
captured  Masada,  and  other  revolutionists  seized  the 
lower  city  and  the  temple,  shutting  up  the  more  aris- 
tocratic classes  in  the  upper  city,3  and  engaged  in 
desultory  battles  with  such  forces  as  were  at  hand  to 
maintain  the  peace.  The  long-standing  hatred  be- 
tween social  classes  helped  to  swell  the  madness. 
The  Sicarii  joined  the  crowds  in  the  lower  city, 
attacked  and  burned  the  palaces  of  the  high  priest, 
Agrippa,  and  Berenice,  and  then  set  fire  to  the  public 
archives  and  all  bonds  in  order  to  cancel  all  debts.  In 
the  meantime  a  Galilean,  Manahem,  another  son  of  Manahem. 
Judas,  forced  the  garrison  to  flee  from  Antonia,  killed 
the  high  priest  Ananias,  and  set  himself  up  as  king.4 

1  War,  ii.  14  : 4-6.  3  War,  ii.  17  : 2-5. 

2  War,  ii.  16  ;  17  : 1.  *  War,  ii.  17  : 8,  9. 


198      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Massacres. 


Defeat  of 

Cestius 

Gallus. 


But  he  was  not  the  sort  of  Messiah  wanted,  and  the 
Zealots  under  Eleazar  captured  him,  and,  after  tortur- 
ing, killed  him.  The  breach  with  Eome  was  com- 
pleted by  the  priests'  ceasing  to  offer  sacrifices  for  the 
emperor  and  by  the  slaughter  of  the  Eoman  garrison 
who  had  surrendered. 

As  in  France  after  the  capture  of  the  Bastile,  the 
news  of  these  events  threw  all  Syria  into  disorder. 
Palestine  was  filled  with  wandering  bands  of  Jews, 
who  sacked  and  burned  many  of  the  Graeco-Eoman 
cities,  or  their  dependent  towns,  while  others  of  these 
cities —  and  Alexandria  as  well  —  massacred  the  Jews 
living  within  them.1  At  this  juncture  Cestius  Gallus, 
the  Syrian  legate,  undertook  to  restore  peace.  Divid- 
ing his  forces,  he  sent  one  army  to  capture  Joppa  and 
its  neighbourhood,  while  the  other  reduced  Galilee. 
Both  objects  were  accomplished  without  great  dif- 
ficulty, and  he  then  marched  upon  Jerusalem,2 
driving  the  few  Jewish  troops  before  him.  At 
Gabao  (el  J&b),  a  few  miles  from  the  capital,  he  was 
attacked  fiercely,  but  unsuccessfully,  and  then,  unwill- 
ing to  appeal  to  force,  endeavoured  to  persuade  the 
Jews  to  surrender  by  the  appeals  of  Agrippa.  In 
this  he  was  thwarted  by  the  murderous  patriotism  of 
the  Zealots.  Then,  perhaps  seeing  the  impossibility 
of  taking  the  city,  he  retired.  The  Jews  followed 
him,  hanging  upon  his  rear  and  flanks,  and  at  last 
attacked  him  in  the  narrow  valley  of  Beth-horon, 
nearly  annihilating  his  entire  army.  Cestius  saved 
himself  and  a  fraction  of  his  forces,  only  by  precipi- 
tate flight  to  Antioch.  All  his  artillery,  together  with 
most  of  his  baggage  and  large  quantities  of  weapons, 
fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Jews,3  most  of  the  treasure 
going  to  Eleazar  the  Zealot. 


War,  ii.  18  : 1-8.      2  War,  ii.  18  : 11.      3  War,  ii.  19  ;  1-9. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  199 

With  this  victory  a  new  stage  began  in  the  revolt,  Organisa- 
for  the  well-to-do  and  official  classes,  seeing  war  to  revohitio^f. 
be  inevitable,  undertook  to  organise  the  state  upon 
a  revolutionary  basis.  Although  many  prominent 
citizens  left  Jerusalem  at  this  time,  enough  remained 
to  begin  the  organisation  of  the  state  upon  Pharisaic 
lines.  If  the  Messiah  had  not  come,  Judea  should  at 
least  be  a  nation;  and  the  subsequent  history  of  this 
period  (66-70  A.D.)  may  very  well  be  viewed  as  a 
political  experiment  on  the  part  of  the  moderate,  and 
then  of  the  fanatical  devotees  to  Messianism.  At  the 
outset,  of  the  two  parties,  the  more  radical,  with 
Eleazar,  the  treasurer  of  the  temple,  at  its  head,  was 
not  represented  in  the  government.  Although  the 
people  of  Jerusalem  conducted  the  revolt,  the  Sanhe- 
drin  was  undoubtedly  in  control  of  affairs,1  and  its 
appointees  were  from  the  party  of  aristocratic,  mod- 
erate revolutionists.  At  the  head  of  this  moderate 
party  —  whose  purpose,  undoubtedly,  was  to  treat  as 
soon  as  possible  with  the  Romans2  —  stood  Ananus, 
the  former  high  priest.  A  number  of  prominent  men 
were  chosen  to  organise  the  revolt  throughout  the 
country,  and  to  take  the  first  steps  in  the  establish- 
ment of  the  old  aristocratic  republic  of  pre-Asmonean 
days,  though  apparently  with  a  high  priest  deprived 
of  political  powers. 

Probably  the  most  important  of   the  fields   thus  Josephus  in 
allotted  to  these  "  deputies  on  mission  "  was  Galilee,   Galllee- 
certain  to  be  the  first  point  of  the  Eoman  attack,  and 
Galilee    was    given    to   the   young    and    clever,   but 
thoroughly  inexperienced,  Josephus,  the   future  his- 
torian.   His  position  was  by  no  means  a  sinecure.    The 
Galileans   were    divided    into    two    parties:    one  of 
which,  composed  of  Greeks,  and,  doubtless,  the  great 

1  Josephus,  Life,  12  ;  War,  ii.  20  : 1-5. 

2  War,  iv.  5:2;  cf .  Josephus,  Life,  7. 


200      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Progress  of 
the  Zealots 
in  Galilee. 


The  war  in 
Galilee. 


mass  of  the  Jews,  had  no  desire  to  become  involved 
in  a  war  with  Borne ;  while  the  other  was  composed 
of  as  fanatical  Zealots  as  were  to  be  found  in  Judea 
itself.  With  the  first  party,  Josephus  succeeded  very 
well.  Doubtless,  they  shared  in  his  general  policy  of 
carrying  resistance  just  far  enough  to  forestall  the 
Zealots,  and  to  win  favourable  terms  from  Rome.  But, 
with  those  possessed  of  downright  determination  to 
fight  to  the  death;  with  the  fanatics  who  destroyed 
the  palace  of  Herod  Antipas  at  Tiberias  because  of 
its  sculptures ;  and  especially  with  one  John  of  Gis- 
chala,  the  leader  of  a  band  of  four  hundred  desperate 
patriots  —  with  such  men,  Josephus  had  the  greatest 
difficulty.  While  he  was  bustling  about  the  country, 
building  walls,  organising  his  raw  levies  as  best  he 
knew  after  the  Roman  fashion,  haranguing  them  in 
the  cause  of  discipline  and  moderation,  forcing  his 
troops  to  return  stolen  goods,  and  organising  a  revo- 
lutionary government,  with  its  central  council  of 
seventy  and  its  local  councils  of  seven,  John  was 
imploring  the  Sanhedrin  to  remove  the  half-hearted 
doctrinaire,  and,  when  that  effort  failed,  was  endeavour- 
ing to  assassinate  him.1  Many  and  great  were  the 
dangers  to  which  the  shifty  Josephus  was  exposed; 
but,  by  infinite  strategy,  he  delivered  himself  out  of 
them  all  —  to  live  to  write  of  his  experiences  with 
such  delightful  self-appreciation  that,  despite  its  hor- 
rors, his  story  of  the  war  in  Galilee  almost  serves 
as  a  serio-comic  introduction  to  the  fearful  tragedy 
enacted,  three  years  later,  at  Jerusalem. 

When  Vespasian  finally  marched  against  Galilee, 
most  of  the  work  of  Josephus  went  to  the  limbo  of 
all  paper  republics.  Sepphoris,  the  most  powerful 
city  in  Galilee,  opened  its  gates  to  the  invaders,2  and 


War,  ii.  20  : 6-21  : 10. 


2  War,  iii.  2  : 4. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  201 

the  revolutionary  army  with  its  captains  of  thousands 
and  hundreds  and  tens  fled  to  the  mountain  strong- 
holds. The  war  in  Galilee  thus  became  simply  the 
process  of  capturing  these  strongholds.  Jotapata, 
in  which  Josephus  himself  had  taken  refuge,  fell 
after  a  siege  full  of  desperate  adventures,  and 
Josephus  was  taken  prisoner,  but  only  to  be  treated 
with  honour  by  Vespasian  because  of  his  prophecy 
as  to  the  victor's  future.1  Gadara,  Joppa,  Tiberias, 
fell  into  Vespasian's  hands.  Tarichaea,  a  city  a  little  Sea  fight  at 
south  of  Tiberias,2  was  taken  after  a  bloody  naval  Tarichaea" 
battle  upon  the  Sea  of  Galilee3  and  its  citizens 
slaughtered,  sold  into  slavery,  or  sent  to  Greece  to 
help  dig  Nero's  canal  across  the  isthmus  of  Corinth. 
The  Samaritans  were  slaughtered  011  Mount  Gerizim, 
and  by  September  all  Galilee  and  the  other  rebellious 
regions  north  of  Judea  were  subdued  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Gamala  in  Gaulanitis,  Mount  Tabor,  and  Gis- 
chala  (el-Jisli).  Gamala  alone  offered  any  resistance, 
but  fell  after  a  heroic  defence.4  Vespasian  systemati- 
cally completed  the  isolation  of  Jerusalem  by  the  cap- 
ture of  all  outlying  cities  of  importance,  and  in  each 
case  the  history  of  Galilee  was  repeated.  The  mass  of 
people  submitted  readily  to  the  Romans,  while  the 
bands  of  Zealots,  like  John  of  Gischala,  retreated  to 
Jerusalem,5  there  to  swell  the  already  crowded  popu- 
lation. 

But  with  these  successes   of  the  Romans  came  a  Delay  of  the 
new  phase  in  the  history  of  the  revolt.     Vespasian  had  Romans- 
begun  the  second  year's  campaign  with  vigour,  but 
had  hardly  completed  the  subjection  of  the  outlying 
cities  of  Judea  (68),  when  news  of  the  death  of  Nero 

1  War,  iii.  8  :  8,  9. 

2  Buhl,  Geographie,  227,  228  ;  Smith,  Historical  Geography, 
451  sq. 

3  War,  iii.  10  :  9,  10.     *  War,  iv.  1:1-2:5.      6  War,  iv.  3  :  3. 


202      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Civil  war  in 
Jerusalem. 


The 
Idumeans. 


caused  him  to  suspend  hostilities  and  await  events. 
The  Jews,  thus  relieved  from  immediate  danger,  at 
once  came  under  the  influence  of  the  radical  revolu- 
tionary party  in  Jerusalem.  The  fall  of  Galilee  had 
showed  the  inefficiency  of  the  aristocratic  revolution, 
and  with  the  arrival  of  John  of  Gischala,  who  had 
escaped  from  his  city  just  before  it  fell,  Jerusalem 
was  divided  between  the  two  parties  —  the  Zealots, 
with  Eleazar  and  John  at  their  head,  and  the  moder- 
ates led  by  Ananus  and  other  prominent  priests 
and  rabbis.  In  a  way,  the  struggle  is  thus  seen  to  be 
a  rising  of  the  poor  against  the  rich,  as  well  as  against 
Rome.  At  first  the  moderate  party  was  successful, 
and  shut  their  opponents  up  in  the  temple,  where,  in 
fact,  they  might  have  been  destroyed  but  for  the  regard 
in  which  the  temple  was  held.1  As  it  was,  Anarius 
set  a  guard  around  the  sacred  enclosure,  and  kept  the 
Zealots  close  prisoners.  The  moderate  party  was  at 
the  point  of  victory,  when,  at  the  suggestion  of  John, 
the  Zealots  induced  a  band  of  fanatical  Idumeans  to 
come  to  their  aid  by  the  plea  that  Ananus  and  his 
party  were  tyrants.  During  a  great  storm  these  "  men 
from  Marseilles"  were  admitted  into  the  city,  and 
instantly  inaugurated  a  reign  of  terror.  Ananus  and 
all  prominent  members  of  the  moderate  party  were 
slaughtered  mercilessly.  For  days  robbery  and  mur- 
der held  high  carnival  in  the  name  of  liberty  and  the 
kingdom  of  God,2  until,  at  last,  the  Idumeans,  con- 
vinced that  they  had  been  deceived  by  the  Zealots, 
sickened  of  their  work,  released  such  prisoners  as 
lived,  and  left  the  city,3  leaving  John  of  Gischala  in 
control  of  the  revolution.  The  revolt  had  become 
anti-aristocratic,  as  well  as  anti-Roman,  and  the  old 
hatred  of  the  Sadducees  and  the  rich  now  was  un« 


1  War,  iv.  3  :  5-12.      2  War,  iv.  5  : 1-5.      3  War,  iv.  6  : 1. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA 


203 


checked.  A  certain  Simon  ben-G-iora  —  Simon,  the 
son  of  the  Proselyte  —  gathered  a  band  of  desperate 
malcontents,  and  succeeded  in  getting  control  of  much 
of  the  region  east  of  Jordan,  and  of  Idumea,  includ- 
ing Hebron.  The  Zealots,  still  bent  upon  an  orderly 
republic,  attempted  to  check  him,  and  had  at  one  time 
captured  his  wife,  but  Simon  soon  brought  them  to 
terms.1  In  the  meantime,  perhaps  from  his  desire  to 
prepare  for  the  struggle  with  Rome,  to  which  no  one 
else  in  Jerusalem  seems  to  have  given  any  thought, 
John  seems  to  have  governed  somewhat  tyrannically, 
and  the  remnants  of  the  old  moderate  party,  together 
with  many  disaffected  Zealots,  brought  Simon  into  the 
city  as  an  ally.2  Immediately  a  new  reign  of  terror  Keign  of 
was  begun,  and  the  crowds  of  Jews  within  the  walls  terror> 
were  exposed  to  new  miseries.  So  far  from  Simon's 
reducing  John,  there  were  now  in  Jerusalem  three 
hostile  revolutionary  armies :  the  Galilean  Zealots 
under  John,  encamped  upon  the  Temple  Mount ;  the 
other  Zealots  who  held  the  inner  court  of  the  temple 
—  in  itself  a  formidable  fortress;  and  the  wild  men 
of  Simon  ben-Giora,  who  held  the  upper  city,  and 
indeed  practically  the  rest  of  Jerusalem.  These  three 
bands  —  by  no  means  to  be  confused  with  the  wretched 
inhabitants  of  the  city  themselves  —  soon  engaged  in 
a  mad  war  of  mutual  destruction.  Although  neither 
party  interfered  in  the  sacrifices  in  the  temple,3  all  the 
places  about  the  temple  were  destroyed,  the  sacred 
timbers  used  for  engines  of  war,  the  city  itself  be- 
came half  desert  and  half  camp,  and  almost  all  of 
the  grain  in  the  city  was  burnt. 

All   this   misery  lasted   throughout  69  A.D.,  when   Arrival  of 
Vespasian  was  fighting  for  possession  of  the  empire ;   Tltus- 
and  even  when  Titus  appeared  before  the  city  just  be- 

1  War,  iv.  9  :  3-10.     2  War^  iv>  9  .  n,  12.      3  War^  v.  i  .  3.5. 


204      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Destruction 
of  the  party 
of  Eleazar. 


The  forti- 
fications of 
Jerusalem. 


Siege  of 
Jerusalem. 


fore  the  Passover  of  70  A.D.,  he  found  the  city  still  less 
intent  upon  defence  than  upon  the  issues  of  civil  war. 
Titus  was  actually  before  the  gates  of  the  city  when 
John  of  Gischala,  taking  advantage  of  the  crowds  at 
the  feast,  smuggled  some  of  his  men  into  the  inner 
court  of  the  temple  and  assassinated  Eleazar.  With 
the  rival  parties  thus  reduced  to  two,1  union  was  some- 
what easier,  and  thereafter  John  and  Simon  laboured 
together  in  the  defence  of  the  city. 

Jerusalem  was  impregnable  on  all  sides  but  the 
north.  There,  the  wall  begun  by  Agrippa  I,  and  com- 
pleted by  the  Jews  just  as  the  Romans  appeared,  sur- 
rounded the  suburb  of  Bezetha.  Within  it  ran  the 
second  wall  from  east  to  west,  and  within  this  lay  the 
great  castle-like  temple  flanked  by  the  Tower  of  An- 
tonia  and  separated  from  the  city  by  a  series  of  walls, 
while  upon  the  higher  western  hill  lay  the  upper  city, 
protected  by  its  own  massive  fortifications.  Jerusalem 
was  in  fact  a  cluster  of  fortresses,  approachable  only 
from  the  north.  Had  its  provisions  not  been  de- 
stroyed, it  is  hard  to  see  why  it  might  not  have  with- 
stood the  Eomans  indefinitely. 

As  it  was,  the  siege,  though  conducted  with  great 
skill  and  vigour,  lasted  from  the  middle  of  April  till 
September  —  five  months  of  constant  and  desperate 
fighting.  Twelve  days  were  required  to  break  through 
the  hastily  built  outer  wall,  and  it  was  not  until 
July  that  Antonia  was  taken,  and  then  only  after  the 
city  had  been  completely  surrounded  by  a  wall.  Then 
the  miseries  of  the  besieged  city,  filled  to  overflowing 
with  the  pilgrims  to  the  Passover,  grew  indescribable.2 
Without  the  city  captives  were  crucified  by  the  hun- 
dred, and  deserters  were  cut  open  for  the  gold  they 

1  War,  v.  3  : 1. 

2  See,  for  instance,  War,  v.  12  :  3  ;  13  : 1-7  ;  vi.  2  :  3  ;  3  :  3,  4  ; 
5:3. 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  205 

had  swallowed.  Within  the  walls  famine  and  civil 
war  filled  the  streets  and  houses  with  unburied  dead. 
Prophets  foretold  the  fearful  punishments  of  God.1 
Portents  and  wonders  in  the  heaven  showed  approach- 
ing doom.  Yet  through  it  all  the  daily  morning  and 
evening  sacrifices  were  kept  up  until  priests  and  ani- 
mals alike  failed,  and  on  the  17th  of  July  they  ceased 
forever.  After  this,  the  siege  progressed  steadily. 
Antonia  was  taken  and  rased.  The  beautiful  colon-  Destruction 
nades  of  the  temple  were  burnt.  The  outer  wall  of  the  pie.  * 
temple  was  broken  through,  and  at  last  on  the  tenth  day 
of  the  month  Ab  (August)  the  Romans  burst  through 
the  burning  gates  into  the  sacred  area.  Titus  had 
hoped  to  save  the  temple  itself,  but  some  soldier  threw 
a  blazing  brand  into  one  of  its  rooms,  and  the  building 
was  soon  destroyed.2  After  a  fearful  slaughter  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  city,  Titus  began  the  siege  of  the 
upper  city  in  which  Simon  ben-Giora  and  John  of 
Gischala  made  their  last  desperate  stand.  The  lower 
city  was  burned  to  give  room  for  towers  and  battering- 
rams,  and  after  a  month  the  entire  city  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  Eomans  (September,  70  A.D.).  Thou-  Fall  of 
sands  of  the  inhabitants  were  killed,  sold  into  slavery,  Judea- 
v  or  kept  for  gladiatorial  games.3  John  of  Gischala  was 
condemned  to  imprisonment  for  life.  Simon  ben- 
Giora  was  kept  for  the  triumph  at  Borne,  where  he 
was  put  to  death.  The  city  itself  was  destroyed  as 
far  as  any  city  can  be  destroyed,  and  its  ruins  left  in 
charge  of  the  tenth  legion  and  some  auxiliary  troops.4 
Although  two  years  were  to  elapse  before  the  whole- 

1  War,  vi.  5  : 2,  3 ;  Tacitus,  History,  v.  13. 

2  War,  vi.  4  :  3-7. 

8  War,  vi.  9  : 2,  3  ;  cf.  vii.  3:1.  Josephus  makes  the  total 
number  of  Jews  captured  in  the  war  97,000,  and  of  those  who 
perished  in  the  siege  1,100,000. 

4  War,  vii.  1  : 1-3. 


206      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 


Triumph  of 
Titus. 


Later 
revolts. 


sale  suicide  of  the  garrison  of  Sicarii  at  Masada  pro- 
claimed the  land  at  peace,1  Titus  celebrated  his 
victory  at  Csesarea  Philippi,  Berytus  (Beirut),  and 
Antioch,  and  in  the  summer  of  71  A.D.  was  given  a 
triumph  in  Borne.  The  noblfc  arch  which  the  senate 
later  erected  to  his  memory  still  shows  in  its  bas-re- 
lief the  table  of  shewbread,  the  priestly  trumpets,  and 
the  seven-branched  candlestick  that,  with  the  rest  of 
the  wreckage  of  the  Jewish  state,  were  carried  in  the 
great  procession. 

For  the  Jewish  state  had  indeed  fallen.  Vespasian 
kept  Palestine  as  his  private  property,  a  colony  of 
eight  hundred  veterans  was  settled  at  Emmaus  just 
out  from  Jerusalem,  and  the  Jewish  people  were 
everywhere  made  to  pay  to  the  temple  of  Jupiter 
Capitolinus  the  two  drachmas  they  had  formerly  paid 
to  the  support  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.2  The 
misery  foreseen  by  Jesus  had  come  —  fully,  irretriev- 
ably. The  fall  of  Jerusalem  was  the  outcome  of  the 
Jews'  choice  as  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Had  they  but 
known  the  things  that  pertained  to  peace ! 

Yet  Judaism  was  not  destroyed,  nor  the  Jewish 
Messianic  hope.  The  one  was  to  develop  in  Babylon 
and  Galilee  into  something  severer  and  farther  reach- 
ing than  Shammai  himself  could  have  foreseen,  and 
the  other  was  to  blaze  forth,  not  only  as  a  scholar's 
hope,  but  as  the  incentive  to  new  religious  war  against 
Hadrian,  under  Akiba  and  his  Messiah,  Bar  Cochbar, 
the  Son  of  the  Star.  In  comparison  with  these  later 
developments,  the  Judaism  of  New  Testament  times, 
elaborate  as  it  was,  seems  almost  embryonic.  With 
no  country,  or  temple,  or  high  priest,  the  only  future 
for  Judaism  was  the  Talmud  and  apologetic  Mes- 
sianism,  and  each  alike  bears  witness  to  the  earnest- 
ness of  generations  of  rabbis. 

1  War,  vii.  8  : 1-7  ;  9  : 1,  2.  2  War,  vii.  6  :  6, 


THE  FALL   OF  JUDEA  207 

Yet  in  neither  of  these  two  particulars  was  to  be  Rise  of  the 
the  greatest  significance  of  the  Jew,  but  rather  in  that 
other  Messianic  movement  despised  by  the  rabbis,  the 
Christian  church.1 

For  while  Pharisee  and  Zealot,  constrained  by  their 
scholastic  ideals  of  righteousness,  looked  for  a  divinely 
founded  kingdom  of  the  Jews  that  should  be  inaugu- 
rated by  the  expulsion  of  the  Eomans  ;  and  while,  mad- 
dened by  the  apparent  delay  of  Jehovah,  charlatans 
and  Sicarii  and  Zealots  were  turning  against  the  petty 
oppressions  of  unworthy  governors  and  plunging  the 
nation  into  war  that  the  coming  of  God's  kingdom 
might  thus  be  hastened;  the  little  group  of  humble 
men  and  women  who  had  accepted  Jesus  as  Christ 
and  were  finding  in  his  teachings  a  discipline,  had 
crossed  to  Greece  and  Macedonia,  and  at  last  had 
its  representatives  among  the  inhabitants  of  Eome 
itself.  Under  the  inspiration  of  Paul  it  had  with- 
stood all  efforts  to  bring  the  new  fraternities  under 
Judaism  as  a  system,  and  had  at  last  become  so 
strong  that  few  cities  of  importance  in  the  empire 
did  not  contain  bands  of  simple,  religious  men  and 
women,  who  were  looking  for  a  return  of  Jesus  the 
Messiah,  but  were  practising  none  of  the  requirements 
of  Judaism. 

It  is,  however,  a  mistake  to  think  of  Christianity  The  relation 
as   standing  wholly  as  the  enemy  of  Judaism.     Far 
more  truly  is  it  indebted  to  Judaism.     Without  the  ism- 
life  and  feelings  and  conditions  born  of  the  history 
of  the  three  centuries  we  have  sketched,  the  work  of 
Jesus  and  of  Paul  would  have  been  very  different,  if 
indeed  possible.     Neither  Jesus  nor  Paul  broke  utterly 
with  their  marvellous  nation.     Eather,  they  were  the 
noblest  fruitage  of  Moses  and  the  prophets,  and  when- 

1  See  Mackintosh,  Christ  and  the  Jewish  Law  ;  Toy,  Judaism 
and  Christianity. 


208      NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE 

ever  the  Christian  church  names  its  Christ,  it  is  un- 
consciously paying  tribute  to  the  deep  piety  of  those 
later  Hebrews,  who,  through  persecution  and  disap- 
pointment, with  unswerving  devotion  to  their  ideas 
of  divine  righteousness,  looked  forward  to  a  time 
when  God  would  found  his  kingdom  upon  the  earth, 
and  bequeathed  to  later  generations  a  faith  and  an 
ideal.  But,  for  him  who  accepts  Jesus  as  the  Christ, 
the  faith  of  Chasidim  and  Pharisees,  of  Zealot  and 
Scribe,  is  no  longer  national,  their  ideal  has  become 
the  story  of  a  Life,  and  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  already 
working  its  peaceful  conquests  over  humanity. 


209 


1 

"1 

8 

5 

§      -i 

3 

3    J5_ 

p    s  r  •§ 

1 

00                      OQ                      § 

3      i      5 

HH 

S  °- 

S     I     3 

S 

g 

«s 

"S                ft 

_,§ 

/-^           ^ 

d^ 

2                              o 

o     ^__  o 

—'g  * 

<25            >•_!                     33 

3 

53 

o  ^ 

1 

HH                                         fl 

oa                             ^ 

E 

s 

11 

D 

1      s* 

o 

^H 

"«       ^r       «* 

1 

^     f  ^  s- 

£ 

a 

^"^                       TH 

H 

a 

M  *  i  1  i  f 
p  0  it  it 

!Zi       t>      ^    "    H    B 

S  1  !-!-!-!- 

P-j     S    -3^s« 

<^                             OQ       <1       ^       OQ 

a 

•5 

1      § 

)  Antiochus  VII  Sidel 

5-118,  111-96)  Antiochu* 

02 

d 

.2 

H 

P 

?H                  C^ 

| 

S 

g 

S 

hH                 (—  1 

3 

I 

P 

HH 
1 

i     1 

3  £- 
•1                   fl 

|" 

1 

| 

S 

& 
PH 

—  d          QD           S 

o 

K" 

1               p 

M 

QQ 

d 

—  d 

'g 

M 

1- 

1 

1 

p 

"S 

1 

M 

• 
,__d 

-i 

210 


g 

-In 

OQ 

g 

1 

M 

1 

«o 

X! 

*  ! 

-1 

APPENDI 

E  ASMONEA] 

MattatWas  (16 
1 

1 

i 
_¥ 

W 

"§ 

H 

^ 

h 

a 

ui 

r 


•c 
•< 


211 


£2. 

«  S4  *  x 

!—  1              § 

||J4 

1                  & 

.^ 

1 

S                        ~ 

•8*                  ir* 

^            i 

? 

!                1 

S 

a                        ^^ 

+^        ^S                              n  PS 

03                                                                                                       O      ^ 

_0 

•E                                                    ®    S 

E 

s  «•            > 

2           o>                                         •    ** 

fcH 

I                s  e* 

«        «                              S   e 

^                            1 

0     X          -£- 

2           « 

K^          "                         "^ 

rN        _ 

hH           ^           oa 

=  Mariamme  ( 
i 

-                    «      eg  .2 

i           i   '4  s 

S              §    'S  ^ 

o>                        *~?     t» 

a            §  be 

P      ^     .§-- 

^        P        a 

H     o     <      S 

-9  

i 

OQ                            0                                      *C     5 

-1    ,?        1  1 

rV               o3  ^^  2          03           -r-5    HH 
°               ^S'g  ft        5           "S    ^ 

S    g         -a 

Pj     H            1 

? 

a        ts  W<!      r5        03  ^ 

—  S                    ^^^—                         SH      O 

<q                             *-» 

8 

§                gg                   eg     V« 

,0 

^                                          N_X^^                                                                       QJ 

S 

1 

^        H-I  II                 ^  td 

cd                                    ^ 

H 

S 

s     a  §    g  s 

^u 

|    --c       _|      >  -g 

S~~ 

~"|~      <!              1         ^   L 

£T 

• 

•g                           ^  S 

-I 

S 

t      1         a     8  1 

o 

II 

•S       j          rt      S  S 

hs 

J         °           &     ,a 

3        "a           <       § 

6        ^                  * 

1  1                            § 

p           53                                         ^ 

«                                                     DQ 

S                                               ^03                                                         OQ 

INDEX 


Abomination  of  desolation,  18 

Agrippa  I,  148,  151;  sketch  of 
early  life,  183 ;  appointed  king, 
184 ;  services  to  the  Jews,  185 ; 
attitude  toward  Judaism,  186 ; 
ambitions,  186, 187 ;  Hellenism 
of,  187 ;  death  of,  187 

Agrippa  II,  187, 188,  191, 196, 197 

Albinus,  procurator,  195 

Alcimus,  high  priest,  32,  33,  34, 
37,  38 

Alexander,  procurator,  190 

Alexander,  son  of  Aristobulus 
II,  100 

Alexander,  son  of  Herod  1, 127 

Alexander  Balas,  39,  40,  41, 42 

Alexander  Jannseus,  succeeds 
Aristobulus  I,  76;  wars  of 
conquest,  78,  82;  civil  wars, 
79  f. ;  victory  of,  81 ;  death  of, 
83 ;  results  of  his  reign,  83 

Alexander  of  Macedonia,  1,  2; 
policy  of,  2 

Alexander  Zabinas,  62 

Alexandra,  succeeds  Alexander 
Jannaeus,  86 ;  Pharisees  under, 
87 ;  prosperity  under,  88 ;  death 
of,  90;  mother  of  Mariamme, 
117, 121 

Alexandria,  Jews  in,  9,  157 ;  tem- 
ple at,  40;  hopes  as  to  John 
Hyrcanus,  71 ;  disorders  in,  185, 
198 

Ananias,  high  priest,  197 

Ananus,  high  priest,  195 

Antigonus,  son  of  John  Hyrca- 
nus, 76 ;  son  of  Aristobulus  II, 
103, 106,  113 


213 


Antiochus  III,  6 

Antiochus  IV,  Epiphanes,  acces- 
sion of,  8 ;  taxes  under,  14 ;  in 
Egypt,  15,  17;  policy  of,  16; 
persecution  under,  15,  17 ;  goes 
to  Persia,  25 ;  death  of,  30 

Antiochus  V,  30 

Antiochus  VI,  44 

Antiochus  VII,  56,  59 

Antiochus  VIII,  Grypos,  62 

Antipas,  see  Herod  Antipas 

Antipater,  ambassador  to  Rome, 
44 

Antipater  of  Idumea,  and  Hyr- 
canus II,  91  f. ;  rise  of,  100 ; 
relations  with  Pompey,  101; 
with  Julius  Caesar,  101  f . ;  with 
Cassius,  105 ;  assassinated,  106 

Antipater,  son  of  Herod  I,  127, 
128 

Antony,  107,  119 

Apollonius,  24 ;  governor,  42 

Arabia,  subject  to  Herod  1, 119; 
war  with  Herod  Antipas,  154 

Archelaus  of  Cappadocia,  127 

Archelaus,  son  of  Herod  I,  129; 
reign  of,  130  f . ;  character  of, 
133 ;  deposed,  134 

Aristobulus  I,  75,  76 

Aristobulus  II,  91,  92;  revolts, 
94 ;  made  prisoner  and  deposed 
by  Pompey,  95 

Aristobulus,  brother-in-law  of 
Herod  1, 117, 118 

Aristobulus,  brother  of  Agrippa 
1,184 

Aristobulus,  son  of  Herod  I,  127 

Augustus,  120,  124,  128,  131,  132 


214 


INDEX 


Bacchides,  32,  34,  35,  37,  39 
Berenice,  197 
Beth-horon,  24,  198 
Bethsaida,  Julius,  147 
Beth-zur,  26,  30 

Caesar,  Julius,  relations  with 
Antipater,  101  f . ;  his  reorgani- 
sation of  Judea,102 ;  favours  the 
Jews,  103;  death,  105 

Caesar,  Sextus,  105 

Csesarea,  built  by  Herod  1, 123 

Caesarea  Philippi,  147 

Caius,  184, 185 

Caligula,  see  Caius 

Canon  of  Old  Testament,  growth 
of,  19 

Cassius,  in  Syria,  105 

Cavalry,  used  by  Simon,  57 

Census,  under  Quirinius,  134 

Chasidim,  origin  of,  11 ;  perse- 
cuted, 18  f . ;  join  Mattathias,  21 ; 
slaughtered  on  the  Sabbath,  22 ; 
desert  Judas,  29,  32 ;  treaty  of, 
with  Syria,  31;  rejoin  Judas, 
33 ;  again  desert  him,  34 ;  sup- 
port Jonathan,  40;  new  stage 
in  development  of,  49;  new 
parties  from,  64 

Church,  179,  181,  206 

Citadel  at  Jerusalem,  18,  43,  45, 
51 

Claudius,  186, 187 

Cleopatra,  115,  119 

Coele-Syria,  2,  105 

Crassus,  101 

Customs,  140 

Cypros,  wife  of  Agrippa  I,  183 

Cyrenius,  see  Quirinius 

Damascus,  45, 123 
Daniel,  Book  of,  20 
Decapolis,  the,  154  f . 
Dedication,  Feast  of,  28 
Demetrius  I,  39,  41 
Demetrius  II,  42,  43,  50 
Dispersion,  the,  3,  9,  40,  71,  156, 
157 


Egypt,  3,  15 

Eleazar,  brother  of  Judas,  30 

Eleazar  the  Zealot,  198 

Emmaus,  battle  of,  25 

Emperor,  sacrifice  for,  142,  198 

Enoch,  Book  of,  (Visions)  chs. 
83-90,  20  ;  chs.  91-104,  71 ;  chs. 
36-71  (Similitudes),  85  ;  mes- 
sianism  of,  168 

Essenes,  origin  of,  72;  charac- 
teristics of,  73,  74. 

Ezekias,  a  "  robber,"  104 

Fadus,  procurator,  187 
Felix,  procurator,  191  f . 
Festus,  procurator,  194 
Florus,  Essius,  procurator,  196 

Gabinius,  reorganises  India,  96 

Galileans,  149,  191 

Galilee,  Hellenists  in,  9  ;  Jews  in, 
9 ;  Jews  of,  rescued  by  Simon, 
29;  Lower  Galilee  conquered 
by  John  Hyrcanus,  69 ;  Upper 
Galilee,  by  Aristobulus  I,  76  ; 
under  Herod  I,  103,  104;  con- 
quered by  Herod  I,  111 ;  extent 
of,  148 ;  cities  of,  149 ;  popula- 
tion of,  150 ;  work  of  Jesus  in, 
175  ;  in  the  revolt  of,  66  A.D., 
199  f. 

Gennessaret,  plain  of,  149 

Gerizim,  temple  on,  2,  19 ;  hap- 
penings in,  182 

Gerousia,  Council  of  Jerusalem, 
origin  of,  3;  under  Jonathan, 
45;  under  John  Hyrcanus,  70; 
becomes  judicial  and  academic, 
80  ;  develops  into  Sanhedrin, 
142 

Gilead,  Jews  in,  delivered,  28 

Glaphyra,  wife  of  Alexander  1, 76 

Gorgias,  26 

"  Grecians,"  157 

Hagiographa,  19 
"  Hebrews,"  157 
Helena,  Queen  of  Adiabene,  190 


INDEX 


215 


Heliodorus,  7 

Hellenism,  in  Egypt,  6 ;  and  high 
priest,  7;  wide  spread  of,  9; 
aggressive,  17 ;  under  Herod  I, 
115, 123 ;  of  the  Decapolis  and 
other  Greek  cities,  155,  156  ; 
influence  of,  156-158 

Herod  I,  the  Great,  in  control  of 
Galilee,  103,  104  ;  condemned 
by  Sanhedrin,  104;  made  gen- 
eral of  Coele-Syria,  105;  rela- 
tions with  Antony,  107 ;  journey 
to  Rome,  109 ;  made  king,  110 ; 
captures  Jerusalem,  112 ;  mar- 
ries Mariamme,  112;  conquers 
Antigonus,  113;  character  of, 
113;  treatment  of  Asmoneans, 
115  f . ;  and  Augustus,  120  ; 
buildings  of,  122  f . ;  last  years, 
125  f . ;  loses  and  regains  favour 
of  Augustus,  128 ;  executes  his 
sons,  128 ;  his  death  and  wills, 
129 

Herod  Agrippa  I,  see  Agrippa  I 

Herod  Agrippa  II,  see  Agrippa 
II 

Herod  Antipas,  tetrarch,  148  f . ; 
character  of,  151,  153;  marries 
Herodias,  153;  war  with  Ara- 
bia, 154 ;  deposition  and  death 
of,  154 

Herod  of  Chalcis,  188 

Herod  of  Rome,  153 

Herodias,  153,  183 

High  priest,  position  of,  5  ;  grows 
Hellenistic,  7  ;  appointed  by 
Syrian  kings,  40;  by  Romans, 
102,  144;  by  Herod,  117;  by 
Herod  of  Chalcis,  188  ;  by 
Herod  Agrippa  II,  188 

Hillel,  116 

Hyrcanus  I,  see  John  Hyrcanus 

Hyrcanus  II,  high  priest,  91; 
struggle  with  Aristobulus  II, 
92-94 ;  controlled  by  Antipater, 
100  ;  confirmed  by  Julius 
Caesar,  102  ;  mutilated,  109, 
118;  executed,  120 


Idumea,  conquered  by  John 
Hyrcanus,  61  ;  by  Joseph, 
brother  of  Herod  I,  111  ;  ex- 
tent of,  138 

Idumeans  in  the  revolt  of  66  A.D., 
202 

James,  the  apostle,  186 ;  brother 
of  Jesus,  195 

Jason,  high  priest,  8,  15 

Jerusalem,  essentially  Judea,  3; 
sacked  by  Antiochus  IV,  15, 
17 ;  siege  of,  by  Lysias,  31 ;  by 
Antiochus  VII,  59;  in  the  re- 
volt of,  66, 199 ;  by  Pompey,  94 ; 
by  Herod  I,  112  ;  beautified  by 
Herod  I,  125;  importance  of, 
137;  war  in,  202  f . ;  fortifica- 
tions of,  204;  Titus,  204  f . ; 
captured  and  destroyed,  205 

Jesus  the  Christ,  historical  posi- 
tion of,  169  ;  his  early  life, 
169, 170 ;  his  idea  of  kingdom  of 
God,  171,  172  ;  "  Son  of  Man," 
173  ;  his  fraternity,  175  ;  in- 
fluence upon  his  followers,  177 ; 
arrested,  178 ;  death  and  resur- 
rection, 179 

John  Hyrcanus,  succeeds  his 
father,  59 ;  besieged  by  Antio- 
chus VII,  59 ;  treaty  with,  60 ; 
success  of,  62  ;  results  of  his 
reign,  64  f. ;  changes  party  de- 
pendence, 67 ;  progress  of  mo- 
narchical ideas  under,  69 ; 
how  regarded  by  Alexandrine 
Jews,  71 ;  death  of,  75 

John  of  Gischala,  200,  202 

John  the  Baptist,  170 

Jonathan,  succeeds  Judas,  36; 
first  defeat,  37;  position  of,  38; 
treaty  with  Bacchides,  39  ; 
privileges  granted  him  by 
Demetrius  I,  39  ;  made  high 
priest,  40 ;  captures  Joppa,  42 ; 
success  of,  44  ;  treaty  with 
Rome,  44;  success  and  death 
of,  46,  48 


216 


INDEX 


Joppa,  42,  45,  50,  60,  69 

Jose  ben  Jochanan,  12 

Joseph,  brother  of  Herod  I,  111, 
112 

Joseph,  tax  collector,  5 

Josephus,  199 

Joshua  ben  Perachia,  70 

Judas  of  Galilee,  135 

Judas  Maccabseus,  succeeds  Mat- 
tathias,  22 ;  early  successes  of, 
24;  restores  the  temple,  27; 
plans  of,  28 ;  campaigns  on  the 
east  of  Jordan,  29 ;  misfortunes 
of,  30 ;  position  of,  31 ;  relations 
with  the  Chasidim,  29,  32,  33, 
34 ;  not  high  priest,  33 ;  treaty 
with  Rome,  34;  defeat  and 
death  of,  34 ;  significance  of,  35 

Judea,  a  city-state,  2 ;  organisa- 
tion of,  under  Egypt  and  Syria, 
3 ;  extent  of,  3,  69,  77,  82 ;  re- 
organised by  Gabinius,  96;  by 
Caesar,  102 ;  falls  into  hands  of 
Herod  I,  112 ;  disorders  in,  130, 
131;  census  in,  134,  135;  pro- 
vincial organisation  under  the 
procurators,  136  f.,  139  f.;  life  in, 
159 ;  under  procurators,  190  f . 

Judith,  book  of,  20 

Kingdom  of  God,  see  Messianic 
hope  as  set  forth  by  Jesus,  171  f . 
Kings,  allied,  see  reges  socii 

Laomedon,  2 

Leontopolis,  temple  at,  40 

Logos,  not  involved  in  Messianic 
hope,  168 

Lysias,  governor-general  of  Syria, 
25 ;  campaigns  of,  25, 26 ;  regent 
of  Antiochus  V,  31 ;  grants  re- 
ligious liberty,  31 ;  death  of,  32 

Maccabee,    significance    of    the 

word,  23 

Maccabees,  First  Book  of,  84 
Maccabees,  Second  Book  of,  84 
Malichus,  105,  106 


Mariamme,  granddaughter  of 
Hyrcanus  II  and  wife  of  Herod 
I,  112,  120,  121 

Masada,  suicide  of  garrison,  206 

Mattathias,  revolt  of,  21 ;  sons  of, 
21 ;  death  of,  22 

Menahem,  197 

Menelaus,  high  priest,  11,  Id,  16, 
31 

Messiah,  see  Messianic  hope 

Messianic  hope,  the,  20,  86,  98; 
of  the  Zealots,  126 ;  of  the  Phar- 
isees, 164 ;  development  of,  162 
f . ;  literary  form  of,  165  f . ; 
the  Messiah,  166, 167 ;  titles  of, 
168;  the  double  current,  180; 
disturbances  arising  from,  192 ; 
later  growth  of,  206. 

Michmash,  Jonathan  rules  at,  39 

Mithridates,  102 

Mizpeh,  assembly  at,  25 

Modein,  21,  22,  48 

Nero,  201 

Nicanor,  32,  33 ;  Nicanor's  Day, 

33 

Nicholas  of  Damascus,  123 
Nitai  of  Arbela,  70 
Numenius,  45,  55 

Octavius,  see  Augustus 

Onias  II,  5 

Onias  III,  8 

Onias  of  Alexandria,  40 

Parthians,  invasion  of,  108,  111 

Parties,  consolidation  of,  under 
Simon,  49;  see  Pharisees,  Sad- 
ducees,  Essenes,  Zealots 

Paul,  see  Saul  Paul 

Perea,  150 

Peter,  186 

Pharisees,  origin  of,  49 ;  become 
a  party,  65;  views  of,  65,  66; 
cease  to  be  party  of  govern- 
ment, 67  f . ;  struggle  with  Al- 
exander Jannseus,  79  f. ;  turn 
to  foreign  powers,  81,  107, 132; 


INDEX 


217 


under  Alexandra,  87,  88,  89; 
new  phase  in  history  of,  97; 
consolidated  under  Herod  I, 
117;  opposed  by  Jesus,  176; 
enmity  toward  Jesus,  176 

Pharisees,  literature  of,  2 ;  Enoch, 
20,  71,  85  ;  2  Maccabees,  84; 
Psalms  of  Pharisees,  96,  97 

Phasaelus,  103,  107, 108, 109 

Philip,  tetrarch,  146  f . 

Philo,  Jewish  philosopher,  184 

Pious,  party  of,  see  Chasidim 

Pompey,  in  Syria,  92,  93;  cap- 
tures Jerusalem,  94, 95 ;  in  civil 
wars,  101 

Pontius  Pilate,  procurator,  145, 
182 

Procurator,  office  of,  141  f . ;  pow- 
ers of,  over  high  priest,  144; 
administration  of,  187, 190  f . 

Prophet  expected,  27 

Psalms,  20 

Psalms  of  the  Pharisees,  96,  97, 
98 

Ptolemy  Euergetes,  5 

Ptolemy  IV,  6 

Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  9 

Ptolemy,  son-in-law  of  Simon,  57 

Publicans,  140 

Quirinius,  census  under,  134 

Rabbinism,  64 

Reges  Socii,  113, 186 

Religion  among  the  people,  160 

Resurrection,  167 

Rhodes,  rebuilt  by  Herod  1, 110 

Robbers,  104, 130,  159 

Rome,  relations  with  Antiochus 
IV,  15,  17;  embassies  to,  34, 
44,  55 ;  aid  rendered  the  Jews, 
56,60 

Sabinus,  procurator,  131 

Sadducees,  origin  of,  49 ;  became 
a  party,  67 ;  characteristics  of, 
67 ;  became  party  of  John  Hyr- 
canus,  67 ;  under  Alexandra,  88, 


89 ;  new  phase  in  development 
of,  97 ;  under  Herod  I,  117 

Salome,  sister  of  Herod  1, 117, 127 

Samaria,  city  of,  destroyed,  63; 
rebuilt  by  Herod  I,  123;  dis- 
trict of,  136 

Samaritans,  temple  of,  2,  61; 
sketch  of,  62,  63;  disorders 
among,  182,  191 

Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem,  con- 
demns Herod  I,  104;  powers 
and  organisation  of,  142  f. ; 
members  of,  144 ;  controls  the 
revolt,  199 

Sanhedrins,  local  courts,  96,  142 

Saul  Paul,  181,  194,  207 

Scaurus,  appeal  to,  93 ;  in  Syria, 
95 

Scribism,  161, 162 

Seleucus  IV,  17 

Septuagint,  10 

Seron,  24 

Shammai,  116 

Shechem,  61 

Sibylline  Oracles,  71 

Sicarii,  192, 194, 197 

Simon,  rescues  Jews  in  Galilee, 
29 ;  conquers  Greek  cities,  45 ; 
succeeds  Jonathan,  47 ;  signifi- 
cance of,  48,  54;  treaty  with 
Demetrius  II,  50 ;  coins  of,  51 ; 
high  priest,  51 ;  high-priesthood 
made  hereditary  in  his  family, 
51,  52  ;  prosperity  under,  54; 
relations  with  Antiochus  VII, 
57 ;  death  of,  57 

Simon  ben  Giora,  203 

Son  of  David,  168;  title  refused 
by  Jesus,  178 

Son  of  God,  168 

Son  of  Man,  168  ;  as  used  by 
Jesus,  173 

Spartans,  brothers  of  the  Jews, 
45 ;  treaty  with,  45 

Stephen,  181 

Taxes,  under  the  Syrians,  13, 14; 
in  province  of  Judea,  139 


218 


INDEX 


Temple  robbed  by  Antiochus  IV, 
15;  desecrated,  17;  restored, 
17 ;  entered  by  Pompey,  95 ;  by 
Crassus,  101 ;  rebuilt  by  Herod 
I,  125;  destroyed  by  Titus, 
205 

Tetrarch,  powers  of,  145,  146 

Tetrarchy,  of  Philip,  146  f.;  given 
Agrippa  I,  148;  of  Herod  An- 
tipas,  148  f . ;  given  Agrippa  I, 
151 

Theudas,  190 

Tiberias,  founded  by  Herod  An- 
tipas,  451 

Tiberius,  145,  183 

Titus,  203 

Toparchies,  137 


Tribute  paid  by  high  priest,  4 
Trypho,  46,  47,  56 

Vespasian,  200,  201 
Village  clerks,  138 
Vitellius,  legate  of  Syria,  182 

Wisdom  literature,  4 

Zealots,  origin  of,  126 ;  expecta- 
tions of,  135 ;  influence  of,  196 ; 
in  the  Jewish  war,  198  ;  in 
Galilee,  200 

Zeus,  altar  to,  in  Jerusalem,  18 ; 
temple  to,  on  Gerizim,  19 

Zugoth,  70 


New  Testament   Handbooks 


EDITED  BY 

SHAILER  MATHEWS 

Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Interpretation, 

University  of  Chicago 

Arrangements  are  made  for  the  following  volumes,  and  the  publishers 
will,  on  request,  send  notice  of  the  issue  of  each  volume  as  it  appears  and 
each  descriptive  circular  sent  out  later;  such  requests  for  information 
should  state  whether  address  is  permanent  or  not :  — 

The  History  of  the  Textual  Criticism  of  the 
New  Testament 

Prof.  MARVIN  R.   VINCENT,  Professor  of  New  Testament   Exegesis, 
Union  Theological  Seminary.  [Now  ready* 

Professor  Vincent's  contributions  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  rank  him 
among  the  first  American  exegetes.  His  most  recent  publication  is  "  A  Critical 
and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Philippians  and  to  Philemon  " 
{International  Critical  Commentary},  which  was  preceded  by  a  "  Students' 
New  Testament  Handbook,"  "  Word  Studies  in  the  New  Testament,"  and 


others. 

The  History  of  the  Higher  Criticism  of  the 
New  Testament 

Prof.  HENRY  S.  NASH,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation, 
Cambridge  Divinity  School.  {Now  ready, 

Of  Professor  Nash's  "  Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience,"  The  Outlook  said:  "  The 
results  of  Professor  Nash's  ripe  thought  are  presented  in  a  luminous,  compact, 
and  often  epigrammatic  style.  The  treatment  is  at  once  masterful  and  helpful, 
and  the  book  ought  to  be  a  quickening  influence  of  the  highest  kind;  it  surely 
will  establish  the  fame  of  its  author  as  a  profound  thinker,  one  from  whom  we 
have  a  right  to  expect  future  inspiration  of  a  kindred  sort." 

Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  B.  WISNER  BACON,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation, 
Yale  University.  [Now  ready. 

Professor  Bacon's  works  in  the  field  of  Old  Testament  criticism  include  "The 
Triple  Tradition  of  Exodus,"  and  "  The  Genesis  of  Genesis,"  a  study  of  the 
documentary  sources  of  the  books  of  Moses.  In  the  field  of  New  Testament 
study  he  has  published  a  number  of  brilliant  papers,  the  most  recent  of  which  is 
"The  Autobiography  of  Jesus,"  in  the  American  Journal  of  Theology. 

The  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine 

Prof.  SHAILER  MATHEWS,  Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and 
Interpretation,  The  University  of  Chicago.  [Now  ready. 

The  Congregationalist  says  of  Prof.  Shailer  Mathews's  recent  work,  "  The  Social 
Teaching  of  Jesus"  :    "Re-reading  deepens  the  impression  that  the  author  is 
scholarly,  devout,  awake  to  all  modern  thought,  and  yet  conservative  and  pre- 
intly  sane.     If,  after  reading  the  chapters  dealing  with  Jesus'  attitude 


emmen 


toward  man,  society,  the  family,  the  state,  and  wealth,  the  reader  will  not  aj^rce 
with  us  in  this  opinion,  we  greatly  err  as  prophets. " 


The  Life  of  Paul 

Prof.  RUSH  RHEES,  President  of  the  University  of  Rochester. 

Professor  Rhees  is  well  known  from  his  series  of  "  Inductive  Lessons  "  contributes 
to  the  Sunday  School  Times.  His  "  Outline  of  the  Life  of  Paul,"  privately 
printed,  has  had  a  flattering  reception  from  New  Testament  scholars. 

The  History  of  the  Apostolic  Age 

Dr.  C.  W.  VOTAW,  Instructor  in  New  Testament  Literature,  The 
University  of  Chicago. 

Of  Dr.  Votaw's  *'  Inductive  Study  of  the  Founding  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Modern 
Church,  Edinburgh,  says:  "  No  fuller  analysis  of  the  later  books  of  the  New 
Testament  could  be  desired,  and  no  better  programme  could  be  offered  for  their 
study,  than  that  afforded  in  the  scheme  of  fifty  lessons  on  the  Founding  of  the 
Christian  Church^  by  Clyde  W.  Votaw.  It  is  well  adapted  alike  for  practical 
and  more  scholarly  students  of  the  Bible." 

The  Teaching  of  Jesus 

Prof.  GEORGE  B.  STEVENS,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Yale 
University.  [Now  ready. 

Professor  Stevens's  volumes  upon  "  The  Johannine  Theology,"  "  The  Pauline  The- 
ology,"  as  well  as  his  recent  volume  on  "  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament," 
have  made  him  probably  the  most  prominent  writer  on  biblical  theology  ID 
America.  His  new  volume  will  be  among  the  most  important  of  his  works. 

The  Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  E.  P.  GOULD,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia.  [Now  readv< 

Professor  Gould's  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  of  Mark  (in  the  International  Criti- 
*al  Commentary)  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (in  the  American  Com~ 
mentary}  are  critical  and  exegetical  attempts  to  supply  those  elements  which 
are  lacking  in  existing  works  of  the  same  general  aim  and  scope. 

The  History  of  Christian  Literature  until  Eusebius 

Prof.  J.  W.  PLATNER,   Professor  of  Early  Church  History,   Harvard 

University. 

Professor  Platner's  work  will  not  only  treat  the  writings  of  the  early  Christian 
writers,  but  will  also  treat  of  the  history  of  the  New  Testament  Canon. 

OTHERS  TO   FOLLOW 

*  An  excellent  series  of  scholarly,  yet  concise  and  inexpensive  New  Testament  hand- 
books." —  Christian  Advocate,  New  York. 

"  These  books  are  remarkably  well  suited  in  language,  style,  and  price,  to  at, 
Students  of  the  New  Testament."  —  The  Congregationalist,  Boston. 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

66  FIFTH  AVEHUE,  HEW  YORK 


The  Social  Teachings  of  Jesus 

AN  ESSAY  IN  CHRISTIAN  SOCIOLOGY 


BY 


SHAILER   MATHEWS,  A.M. 

Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Interpretation  in 
the  University  of  Chicago 


i2mo.    Cloth.    $1.50 


Outlook  : 

"  Such  a  study  is  sure  to  be  useful,  and  if  the  reader  sometimes  feels 
that  the  Jesus  here  presented  has  the  spirit  of  which  the  world  for  the 
most  part  approves  rather  than  that  which  brings  its  persecution,  he 
will  with  renewed  interest  turn  to  the  words  of  Jesus  as  narrated  in  the 
four  Gospels." 

Christian  Index  : 

"  We  commend  Professor  Mathews's  book  to  all  interested  in  matters 
sociological,  exegetical,  and  to  all  Christians  who  desire  to  know  the 
will  of  their  Lord  and  Master." 

Congregationalist : 

"  The  author  is  scholarly,  devout,  awake  to  all  modern  thought,  and 
yet  conservative  and  preeminently  sane." 

The  Evangel : 

"  Professor  Mathews  gives  the  thoughtful  reader  a  veritable  feast  in 
this  essay  in  Christian  Sociology.  It  is  well  thought  out  and  carefully 
written.  ...  It  is  surely  an  able  book,  worthy  of  careful  perusal,  and 
gives  promise  of  exerting  a  permanent  influence  upon  Christian  thought 
and  life." 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience, 

BY 

HENRY  SYLVESTER  NASH, 

Professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School, 
Cambridge,  Mass. 

THE  RELATION  BETWEEN  THE   ESTABLISHMENT  OF  CHRISTIAN- 
ITY  IN   EUROPE  AND  THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION. 

Crown  8vo.    Cloth.    Price  $1.50. 


THE  OUTLOOK. 

"  To  the  world's  stock  of  good  books  Professor  Nash  has  added  one 
which  is  not  the  work  of  a  clever  summarizer  only,  but  that  of  a  clear 
and  forceful  originator.  Perhaps  not  since  the  publication  of  Mr.  Kidd's 
volume  has  a  more  genuinely  popular  sociological  work  appeared.  .  .  . 

The  results  of  Professor  Nash's  ripe  thought  are  presented  in  a 
luminous,  compact,  and  often  epigrammatic  style.  The  treatment  is  at 
once  masterful  and  helpful,  and  the  book  ought  to  be  a  quickening 
influence  of  the  highest  kind;  it  surely  will  establish  the  fame  of  its 
author  as  a  profound  thinker,  one  from  whom  we  have  a  right  to  expect 
future  inspiration  of  a  kindred  sort.  .  .  . 

Through  a  multitude  of  original  and  brilliant  metaphors,  similes, 
and  illustrations,  succeeding  one  another  sometimes  in  almost  bewilder- 
ing number,  Professor  Nash  leads  us  step  by  step  in  the  retrospect  of 
the  history  of  man's  individualization.  .  .  ." 

NEW  UNITY. 

"  The  book  is  a  novelty.  It  is  an  interesting  experiment.  It  is  worth 
writing  and  therefore  worth  the  reading.  Professor  Nash  undertakes 
to  demonstrate  the  moral  thread  in  history.  He  follows  this  moral  line 
alone.  It  is  in  order  to  show  the  rise  and  growth  of  the  social  con- 
science. .  .  .  The  style  of  the  book  is  crisp;  but  it  is  never  dull." 
E.  P.  P. 

THE  CRITIC. 

"The  pages  glitter  with  bright  sayings;  there  are  many  attractive 
passages.  The  book  is  more  than  a  tacit  protest  against  the  material- 
istic explanation  of  history." 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


Ethics   and  Revelation 


BY 


HENRY  S.  NASH 

Professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School  at  Cambridge t 
Author  of  "  Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience  " 


1 2 mo.    Cloth.    $1.50 


Nashville  Banner: 

"The  author  goes  into  the  work  with  an  earnestness, 
breadth,  and  intelligence  that  gives  great  interest  to  what 
he  has  to  say." 

Charleston  News  and  Courier: 

"  The  value  and  significance  of  Professor  Nash's  lectures 
lie  chiefly  in  the  advanced  ground  which  he  takes  up  with 
regard  to  the  authority  of  the  Bible  and  the  Church  in  the 
matter  of  religious  and  social  ethics.  He  begins  by  the 
assertion  that  the  Bible  marks  out  the  road  along  which 
conscience  must  travel  if  it  would  treat  our  life  on  earth 
with  abiding  seriousness.  But  he  is  careful  to  show  that 
the  Bible  should  be  seen  and  regarded  in  the  light  of 
history." 

THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


TJSM 

PViWi 

•/  '  •(/ 

•      9*\    H    ikrl 

tOAN 

•4  A  **              mm.     •  A  j%  jk 

MAY    H4®  1943 

MAR    5  1363 

IflnJ       jLef)    I»»^*J 

5       3Jun'49B<? 

\^^ 

i 

AUG1     1956  LU 

^ 

*%> 

REC'D  LD 

AI  IP  07  1Q£9 

ftlJH  i  (    \w£ 

LD  21-100m-7,'33 

I   LJ 


A 


313273 


iffl 


I 


